Potential Recommendation of Dr. Mike Vories of Mount Pleasant, South Carolina

[NEWHAIRPLEASE]

IMHO...most of the results look pretty good..they look natural, with the exception of the 2500 graft case...something just looks awkward to me on that one...Also, the only thing that concerns me is that out of ALL the results Dr Vories posted, and Im sure he probably posted his best, I can say that I wouldn't consider one of them a " true home run " that we've been accustomed to seeing..again, thats my opinion...

[Mickey85]

Upon closer inspection and taking into account the level of baldness and also the conservative quantity of grafts used, I decided to retract my statements in regards to the yield issue. I'm a proud guy but will own up publicly much like I did when I misinterpreted Dr Hakan's price per graft. I don't have a problem with Dr. Vories being inducted and will keep an eye out on his future presentations and patient results.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Mickey,

 

We've already discussed the details privately, but it's an honest mistake. Besides, I appreciate that your heart is in the right place and that you're doing your part to keep our standards high and recommendations credible :-).

 

Bill

[Mickey85]

Mickey,

 

We've already discussed the details privately, but it's an honest mistake. Besides, I appreciate that your heart is in the right place and that you're doing your part to keep our standards high and recommendations credible :-).

 

Bill

 

Hehe I know, I just wanted my sentiments publicly known because my opinion was stated publicly so I feel it's only fair to other members who might be swayed by my opinion and to Dr. Vories also.

[Bill - Seemiller]

For your review, Dr. Vories presented a few more examples of his results

 

3800 Grafts via FUE over 2 days with Dr. Vories

 

Additional hairline close-up pictures from 3110 FUE Graft case

 

Also, below are some of his patient videos from YouTube:

 

5125 Grafts via FUE in one Session (4 days) - Post-op

 

 

 

Dr. Vories demonstrating the Hans Implanter

 

 

 

1200 Grafts via FUE with Dr. Vories

 

 

 

1500 Grafts via FUE - Immediately Post-Op with Dr. Vories

 

 

 

FUE Results on Class 6 (Number of Grafts not Listed)

 

 

[Michael Vories, MD]

The last video should include the graft count of 4225 grafts.

[Denny]

Thank you for the videos, Bill. It is good to know how Dr. Vories uses the Hans implanter. This video does not show clearly the results obtained. For what I could see, which is not so much, the result is good as well as the result from the third video (1.200 grafts).

The only result I think it is really good is the last video. I am very curious to know the results from the first video to compare with the results from the last one. This could give us a better idea of consistent results, if it is the case.

Even tough I am not impressed with the results, I can change my mind if more results could attest yield, density and consistent. I still believe we need some more time.

[Bill - Seemiller]

Thanks for everyone's input on the potential recommendation of Dr. Mike Vories. While the feedback has been a bit mixed, I think most people agree that the work and results we've seen from Dr. Vories is pretty solid.

 

Dr. Vories has done a great job in responding to the community's request and concerns by providing his input on this topic and posting a few additional examples of his results. He's also presented many videos showing his technique, procedure and results on YouTube, some of which have been presented on this topic.

 

Remember that not every result is a homerun depending on a number of factors such as a patient's level of hair loss, hair characteristics, donor hair availability, hair/scalp contrast ratio, etc. Dense packing, while ideal in some cases, isn't always appropriate for patient's with higher levels of hair loss. Furthermore, many patients require more than one hair transplant to achieve any real level of density.

 

Moreover, dense packing and large megasessions (while often desirable) is a requirement for membership in the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration physicians, not recommendation. To see our standards for recommendation, click here. That said, Dr. Vories does provide dense packing up to 50 FU/cm2 when appropriate for the patient, which quite often is enough density to provide patients with an adequate illusion of density.

 

Since he's already presented over a dozen examples of his results and all of them look pretty solid, I suggest we give Dr. Vories a chance and recommend him to our community. Thus, I've gone ahead and approved him for recommendation on the Hair Transplant Network. To view his recommendation profile, click here.

 

I trust we'll continue to see additional impressive examples of his work and results in the months to come.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[Blake Bloxham]

Congratulations, Dr. Vories! I think you make a very nice edition to our community. Look forward to reviewing more of your results.

[TakingThePlunge]

Congratulations Dr. Vories. I'm looking forward to seeing more great stuff from you.

[larrys1]

Dear forum members,

 

 

Dr. Vories uses the NeoGraft machine with punches as small as .8mm to extract follicular units and carefully places grafts using the "stick and place" technique with the Hans implanter. Dr. Vories is very hands on and extracts and places all follicular units himself.

 

Dr. Vories recognizes the controversy surrounding the NeoGraft and its marketing and feels strongly that the skill and experience of the physician is significantly more important than which tool they use. Dr. Vories believes the NeoGraft machine can be a valuable tool in experienced hands but is not for the neophyte physician and/or untrained technicians.

 

Dr. Vories feels that the suction of the NeoGraft allows him to enter only the first 2-3mm of the dermis to "grip" the follicle and minimizes transection since neither the "bulb" or the "bulge" or disturbed during the extraction process. While some physicians have expressed concerns that the NeoGraft machine may lead to desiccation (dehydration which leads to death of the follicle), Dr. Vories hasn't seen evidence of this in his hands.

 

 

 

Bill

 

 

Please forgive me but I have to call major BS on this!

 

For years we have been told and I have mindlessly repeated to patients. That the NeoGraft was bad for hair transplants.

 

For years we have been told that the NeoGrafts Traction, Torrision, Desiccation, strong vaccum damage and heat build up from the drill boring in the scalp caused friction and tissue damage. This has been repeated by you, your staff, doctors and minions.

 

Now this doctor it seems only uses the NeoGraft, he pays his money and now he is a member? What gives?

 

Is the NeoGraft Safe or Not?

 

By the way, how many more members use the NeoGraft?

 

I for one would love to see a lot less NeoGraft systems out there, they seem to be poping up all over the place.

 

Also if it was not for Techs there would be no Hair Transplant doctors. Let's stop fooling ourselves and the public. We are right there doing the bulk of the work in the majority of the cases.

 

FYI and please dont get me started on the Artas. If dr. Jim Harris was such an expert with his tool and it harvested 1000 grafts per hour with very low transection. why would he go out and spend $200k on a machine which was slower and could not do dark skinned people and needed to use a larger punch diameter? Never saw anyone call him out on this.

 

Manual punches will never be replaced and neither will techs.

[greatjob]

Please forgive me but I have to call major BS on this!

 

For years we have been told and I have mindlessly repeated to patients. That the NeoGraft was bad for hair transplants.

 

For years we have been told that the NeoGrafts Traction, Torrision, Desiccation, strong vaccum damage and heat build up from the drill boring in the scalp caused friction and tissue damage. This has been repeated by you, your staff, doctors and minions.

 

Now this doctor it seems only uses the NeoGraft, he pays his money and now he is a member? What gives?

 

Is the NeoGraft Safe or Not?

 

By the way, how many more members use the NeoGraft?

 

I for one would love to see a lot less NeoGraft systems out there, they seem to be poping up all over the place.

 

Also if it was not for Techs there would be no Hair Transplant doctors. Let's stop fooling ourselves and the public. We are right there doing the bulk of the work in the majority of the cases.

 

FYI and please dont get me started on the Artas. If dr. Jim Harris was such an expert with his tool and it harvested 1000 grafts per hour with very low transection. why would he go out and spend $200k on a machine which was slower and could not do dark skinned people and needed to use a larger punch diameter? Never saw anyone call him out on this.

 

Manual punches will never be replaced and neither will techs.

 

I completely disagree with any blanket statement bashing a particular tool like neograft, atas, chio or what ever it is. Bottom line is a tool is a tool just like any other tool. If one carpenter does terrible work using a particular tool does that mean the tool is bad? No it means the carpenter is bad. Same logic applies to hair transplants just because one doctor does a terrible job using a particular tool doesn't mean the tool is bad just the operator.

 

I think a lot of the new technologies get a bad name because many unskilled doctors purchase them thinking they will do all the work for them, and then they produce crap results. The argument against the neograft in the case of Dr. Vories is completely irrelevant because as the evidence shows Dr. Vories is able to achieve excellent results using it.

 

Also you seem to know a lot about this forum for only your first post, just a hunch but did you create a new account so you could voice disapproval anonymously as I think that happens pretty frequently?

[Bill - Seemiller]

Larry,

 

This community doesn't mind genuine criticism, but it's clear you've never taken the time to research and read content, various articles and numerous comments posted by this community's publishers, physicians and patients.

 

When the NeoGraft first became a hot topic on this discussion forum a couple of years ago, patients and physicians alike (including the publishers of this community) expressed concerns about how the machine was marketed to patients as a "procedure" rather than an extraction device and their claims that neophyte physicians and/or untrained medical professionals could produce results using the NeoGraft on par with experienced and skilled surgeons. Furthermore, the publishers of this community did discuss the NeoGraft device with several leading surgeons recommended by this community who've either used or witnessed its use who've provided concerns about possible dessication and other potential complications that may lead to follicular damage.

 

The reality is, as every surgeon acknowledges, every tool comes with its own unique set of advantages and disadvantages and ultimately, each surgeon has their own preference as to which tool works best in their hands.

 

We've never been dead set against the NeoGraft as an extraction device. However, we've published plenty of content warning patients not to blindly buy into the marketing hype and put physician selection (including their skill and experience) far ahead of which tool they use.

 

However, because of the controversy surrounding the NeoGraft, I initially expressed my concern to Dr. Vories about the NeoGraft which led to a long conversation about the company's initial misleading marketing, potential complications and how he's overcome them. I feel confident that after speaking with him, that the NeoGraft device (not the company) can be a valuable tool (though not perfect) in experienced hands. However, I firmly believe that hair transplant surgery shouldn't be performed by any inexperienced surgeons/technicians no matter which tool they use - unless under the direct supervision of a skilled and experienced surgeon.

 

Since it's clear you are someone familiar with this forum using a new anonymous name to voice disapproval, you must also know that we've turned down far more physicians interested in potential recommendation than those we've approved. Frankly, if we simply took advertising money rather than chose physicians based on our demanding standards, our list of doctors would exceed 400.

 

There's been a lot of focus by this community on extraction tools. And while newer and innovative tools are interesting to discuss, the reality is, there are skilled and experienced surgeons yielding excellent FUE results with various tools. Our focus at the Hair Transplant Network is on quality surgeons and their results. The tools they use are for informational purposes only.

 

Bill

[Bill - Seemiller]

Larry,

 

Your comments regarding Dr. Harris only further indicates what a fool you are. Even the best physicians are constantly innovating and striving to further improve their results. Many of the world's leading surgeons use Dr. Harris' powered SAFE scribe and yield excellent FUE results. Dr. Harris' acquisition of the ARTAS is an attempt to further innovate an already highly refined technique.

 

The last line in your post is a mouthful. Nobody ever said technicians or manual punches would be replaced. Physicians have the right to choose and use the tools and techniques that they feel work best in their hands and I agree that technicians will always be needed. However, techicians will never replace physicians either and in my opinion, technicians should not be performing surgical procedures unless licensed to and under the direct supervision of the qualified physicians.

 

Bill

[larrys1]

Let's see.

 

According to the doctor and most people who use the SAFE scibe. They can achieve 5% or less transection which is the same claim as the Artas and the safe scibe costs about $4000, and has a smaller Outside Diameter than the Artas needs and and the Artas its slower and it costs about $195,000 more, plus maintenance.

 

So to some it up.

 

Slower

More Invasive (last i heard Artas needed a 1.2mm punch - this is 33% larger than a 0.8mm punch)

Higher costs to patients to make up the overhead

ohhh and it can't do dark skinned people.

 

I am all for innovation. But seems like a step backward to me and anyone else with common sense would be a fool not to agree. The Artas is just a big giant, slower SAFE Scribe with a larger punch diameter which has something aginst dark skinned people.

 

Why would a doctor not want the SAFE Scribe? Maybe - Marketing? Robots are cool, dental drills not so much.

 

Regarding your comment that technicians should not be performing surgical procedures - who is the one who is being foolish now.

 

Every single case that the technicians are involved with ARE performing surgery.

 

In the Eyes of the Law, there is no difference between removing tissue and transplanting LIVE tissue back in the human body.

 

Besides there may be only a handful of clinics where a doctor does all 100% of the FUE harvesting.

 

Any doctor who says that THEIR clinic is better because the doctor does all the FUE harvesting and then leaves up the implanting to the techs is totally full of poo.

 

Same goes for FUT.

 

Ask your self this. What is more important -taking it out or putting it in? Which is harder? Taking out or putting in?

 

If the grafts are not handled with care and then properly placed, the hair may not grow. This is the exact reason why patients go to the doctor - hair growth. Why would doctors leave the most important aspect (potential hair growth) up to someone other than themselves - the actual doctor.

 

 

 

This is the dirty little secret to the Hair Transplant industry. Its all about the Techs.

 

Its about time Techs get the credit for actually performing the bulk of the surgical procedure.

 

Does a plastic surgeon, replace the hand and then leave the fingers up to techs? No, they perform the entire procedure. From start to finish.

 

What other surgical procedure in medicine has unlicensed people performing (the bulk) surgery?

 

I would love to hear any doctor explain how he/she can justify techs implanting live tissue back into the body. But has major concerns with the same techs removing the tissue.

 

The beauty of this entire issue is that the doctors know this dirty little secret and they don't want the medical boards anywhere near this issue. Because if they start making a big stink about techs doing the bulk of the harvesting in FUE cases.

 

The logical question to be asked by the medical boards is? If technicians can't take tissue out why is it OKAY for technicians to put tissue back in?

 

As soon as that question is asked (and not anwsered) hair transplants as we know them will stop and prices will go through the roof.

 

Only then will doctors be able to say....They DO the entire procedure from start to finish.

 

If doctors really truly cared about techs doing the bulk of the harvesting in FUE cases, they would petition medical boards in every single state. But this will not happen for fear that the medical board will turn around and not let any tissue be handled by any person who is unlicensed. I would say a PA at the lowest level of license.

 

 

But Hair Transplant doctors are not going to want to pay Techs who are also a Physicans Assasitant - the kind of money which they demand. Because as we all know Techs are not paid that well.:rolleyes:

 

Please let that sink in for a moment!

 

IF Hair Transplant doctors truly wanted what is best for the patients. They would either do the enitre procedure themselves or at the very least have only PA's doing all the implanting.

[Spanker]

I think techs are very important. I have never head a doc say that they weren't. Not really sure what the rant is all about, but ok.

[Blake Bloxham]

Larry,

 

Very odd rant. Frankly, I'm a bit confused and I think you are making some bold statements that are not entirely accurate:

 

1. The law definitely differentiates between removing FUT strips, FUE grafts, making incisions, and actually placing the grafts in the scalp. In a lot of states, no one besides the physician is allowed to pierce the scalp (with a scalpel or punch tool).

 

2. Have you ever sat through a plastic surgery procedure? Or observed/participated in any sort of surgical procedure? Frankly, I've observed, assisted, and participated in quite a few, and there are a LOT of technicians and assistants performing important surgical tasks the entire time. Technicians and assistants participating in surgery is something that is definitely not restricted to hair restoration. If you think plastic surgeons (in the example you gave) are the only ones participating in a plastic surgery operation, I must beg to differ.

 

What's more, I don't think anyone is really debating the importance and the role of quality hair transplant technicians. I don't think any physician tries to hide this fact, nor do I feel as if it is an "industry secret" by any means.

 

Additionally, from here on out, let's try to make any further discussion about Dr. Vories, his recommendation, and his specific practice. Thanks.

[Denny]

The (huge) difference between two recommendations: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/169476-potential-recommendation-dr-christian-bisanga-brussels-belgium.html

 

It is clear to me we should wait a little longer. I am not responsible for this Forum but my opinion was requested...

[Bill - Seemiller]

Larry,

 

I never said that technicians shouldn't be involved in surgical procedures. I specifically stated "technicians should not be performing surgical procedures unless licensed to and under the direct supervision of the qualified physicians".

 

Nobody is denying that technicians play a vital role in the hair transplant procedure. So I don't know where this rant is coming from and why you are debating it so heavily. I've said it before and said it again, technicians are often the "unsung heroes" of the hair transplant profession. They certainly deserve more recognition than they receive.

 

The above said, this topic is reserved to discuss the potential recommendation of Dr. Vories, not a debate about the SAFE scribe and the ARTAS, two devices that Dr. Vories doesn't even use.

 

While I don't mind a healthy and constructive debate, it's clear that you're a troll who's only come to distort facts and poison the well. Thus, I'm no longer going to entertain you and your pointless rants.

 

Bill

[Bill - Seemiller]

Denny,

 

I appreciate you taking the time to share your opinion. I'm not sure if you read the above post (before Larry's rant) or not, but we did approve Dr. Vories for recommendation based on the solid work and results he's presented.

 

Each surgeon has their own distinct technique and even amongst those we recommend, experience and results will vary somewhat and patients will always have their favorites. Those we recommend however, have met our demanding physician selection standards.

 

Dr. Bisanga (who you've referenced) is certainly doing state of the art FUE and FUT and has been for a long time. I believe we should soon consider him for the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration Physicians. However, we typically start out by recommending physicians who show solid evidence that they do outstanding work and in time, those who we feel have gone above and beyond are eligible to be considered for the Coalition.

 

I do feel that Dr. Vories is doing very solid FUE in South Carolina and meets our standards for recommendation. Whether or not he'll be eligible for the Coalition, we'll know with time.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[Denny]

Tks, Bill. I am glad to know Dr. Bisanga is being considered for coalition, he deservers it!

 

I am looking forward to seeing good, solid and consistent works from Dr. Vories.

 

All the best,

[dudewheresmyhairdude]

"The Artas is just a big giant, slower SAFE Scribe with a larger punch diameter which has something aginst dark skinned people."

 

Funniest thing I've read on this forum. Stay away from Artas, he's a giant, slow racist!

Edited May 22, 2013 by dudewheresmyhairdude