Something to consider BEFORE FUE

[Patriot34]

A good friend of mine got FUE done a few years ago and believed it was the best option with his hair transplant because it was the newest method. Though I see now why it is not the best option, in my opinion.

 

When you boil it all down, any current hair transplant surgery is basically moving hair from one spot on the head to another spot on the head. The problem with FUE is you are thinning out the back of the head to simply fill in another area. I feel like the back of his head looks horrible because of the thinning due to FUE. The reason FUT seems like a better option to me is because it is still the same principle, but you lose some of the scalp in doing so which doesn't thin out the back of your head, but will of course leave a scar that is easily hidden if you have a good surgeon.

 

Plus, anyone who has been around this forum for a while will tell you that most people who are actually happy with their HT have had more than one operation. If you are doing multiple FUE you will see that in the future the back of your head will look pretty bad. At least with FUT you can cut over the same scar and harvest additional grafts.

 

I believe FUE has it's place in this field, but only for SMALL operations when the patient is older and won't likely need additional surgeries. I am seeing reputable clinics posting high graft yield hair transplant using FUE on here and it is disconcerting to me. This is something I don't see too many doctors talking about and I think it is a huge disservice to patients. Before doing FUE just think about it logically. You are taking hair from an area that will NEVER grow back. When you do this in large numbers it is very noticeable and is something you can't really fix with additional surgeries because you can't harvest more hair somewhere else to place in the thinning area that was harvested or the process.

 

My advice, plan for the future and know when FUE should be considered and when it should be avoided. Unfortunately, you can't count on all doctors to advise you properly on this because some will do whatever a patient wants regardless of any foresight.

[stinger99]

Hi, this is why you should go to a reputable fue doctor who will not over harvest the donor area. Also, it is important for doctor to evaluate if there is any miniaturization in donor. Dr bisanga tested for this on me. Also calculated that I have safely about 5500 which would remove only 30 percent of donor. Doctors that remove higher percentage and don't check for minaturization in donor can less to over thinning of donor. When done and evaluated properly and conservatively then over thinning should not be an issue.

[Rootz]

I'm afraid you are mistaken in that If you have decent donor hair density and go to a reputable doctor, it doesn't noticeably thin the donor hair. At all.

 

Your friend had low donor density and/or went to a bad doctor. He is probably very lucky he did not get a FUT as all else being equal he'd likely be in an even worse boat.

 

Do you have pics?

[greatjob]

 

 

[BaldingBogger]

As said not really a valid argument if he went to decent surgeon. A reputable surgeon would not harvest over 30% in the donor which is enough to leave in the donor to leave no visible signs of thinning.

 

Also the logic of the argument does not stand up as if he had FUT and his donor thinned to that extent he would be in a lot worse position. At least he has the option to buzz it all off. He would not be able to buzz it down with FUT.

[Gotime]

Having had a 3,553 FUE session, I can't tell any difference in my donor area before and after the surgery so I completely disagree with the message you are sending people. I'm glad that I had an easy recovery and no scar, I wouldn't have done my surgery any other way. There are large cases where in my opinion strip might be the right choice to maximize grafts but even then some surgeons are getting lots of hair over a couple of FUE sessions. I know in my case I was told I still have about the same number of grafts left in the bank should I ever need them in the future.

[Blake Bloxham]

I believe most state that donor thinning isn't apparent until approximately 50% of the available follicular units have been harvested. What's more, I think the transition to smaller diameter FUE punch grafts have decreased the incidence of the "moth eaten" post-FUE appearance. As a few others stated, reputable FUE surgeons should be able to assess donor density and ensure they do not over harvest.

[Since21]

Plus, anyone who has been around this forum for a while will tell you that most people who are actually happy with their HT have had more than one operation.

 

This is simply not true. I see a lot of stellar results - both FUT and FUE - posted on here after just one procedure.

[JohnGage]

Patriot34,

Not true at all...! Please do some more research..! It's not about FUE or Strip... either can be a disaster at the hands of the wrong surgeon!

[Mickey85]

The reason FUT seems like a better option to me is because it is still the same principle, but you lose some of the scalp in doing so which doesn't thin out the back of your head, but will of course leave a scar that is easily hidden if you have a good surgeon.

 

 

Unadulterated fallacy.

 

Care to show me a surgeon who guarantees a thin scar? You do know alot of it has to do with individual physiology and the contracts you sign the day of your strip procedure state this? I have seen stretched scars from Feller, H&W, Feriduni, Lindsey etc etc. No surgeon can predict the outcome of a scar. Having good donor closure can mitigate the chances of a scar stretching but does not eliminate the chances of it stretching. I went to an elite surgeon and I can't shave down past a grade 6 without showing the the scar. I hardly call that "easily hidden". I didn't even have a strip 'megasession' either. Many others report the same thing after having strip surgery only to have to resort to FUE in order to remedy the stretched scar. The top surgeons usually get good scars, but no surgeon is exempt from inadvertently producing a bad scar. It is largely dependent on the individual's physiology which cannot be assessed and qualified prior to strip surgery.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Mickey85

[Shampoo]

 

 

yes the Holy Grail is under attack!....lol

[salinger7]

I've seen great results both FUT and FUE. It all depends what is more important to you. I would rather have FUE because I just can't accept having a piece of my scalp amputated and all the risks associated- nerve damage, numbness, tightness and stretched scar. In the right hands FUT and FUE can produce wonderful results.

[jfables]

I've seen great results both FUT and FUE. It all depends what is more important to you. I would rather have FUE because I just can't accept having a piece of my scalp amputated and all the risks associated- nerve damage, numbness, tightness and stretched scar. In the right hands FUT and FUE can produce wonderful results.

 

Same here. I went to a bad FUE clinic years back and the tech overharvested in a small area. It looks thin when shaved but is still not so bad that anyone notices. I'm sure there are still plenty of negligent FUE clinics out there doing this. You have to be very careful in the doc you choose whether it's FUE or Strip.

 

I had 2600 FUE with Lorenzo 5 months back and I don't even notice any thinness from that. He spread out the extractions methodically.

[Biz]

The debate rages on! :-) Frankly, I think both procedures have their place in hair restoration and a,s previously stated, in the hands of the right doctor, both can produce excellent results. As a NW 6/7 with low density and fine hair, FUE was not an option for me. I'm very pleased with my FUT procedures (have had 2) and have not experienced any stretching, etc. Hair restoration is science and art and there is no one size fits all solution. Each of us has to make the decision that is right for our particular situation which is why research is critical. Thankfully I found the network before I took the plunge! Just my opinion to add to the mix.

[Mickey85]

The debate rages on! :-) Frankly, I think both procedures have their place in hair restoration and a,s previously stated, in the hands of the right doctor, both can produce excellent results. As a NW 6/7 with low density and fine hair, FUE was not an option for me. I'm very pleased with my FUT procedures (have had 2) and have not experienced any stretching, etc. Hair restoration is science and art and there is no one size fits all solution. Each of us has to make the decision that is right for our particular situation which is why research is critical. Thankfully I found the network before I took the plunge! Just my opinion to add to the mix.

 

That is totally cool. I was not having a go at anyone for electing to go through with strip, I was having a go at the OP making fictitious and cavalier claims like "but will of course leave a scar that is easily hidden if you have a good surgeon" which is not always the case.

 

In my personal opinion, I believe FUE should be the first avenue looked at for surgical hair restoration surgery. If the patient is not deemed suitable due to their lack of donor density and large area of baldness(and not the surgeons unwillingness to perform FUE or lack of skill), then the patient could look into strip for a solution only after being fully briefed of the potential ramifications. The patient should be fully informed about BOTH procedures. Just my opinion, if someone wants to go ahead with strip, that is up to their discretion and I wish them all the very best.