FUT vs FUE transection rates

[joeshmo209]

I've seen many things comparing transection rates between fut and fue. Some say fut has 1-2% transection rates and fue has 5-10% transection rates. There seems to be a lack of information. I know it varies from doctor to doctor but there must be some generalities.

 

Is there anyone out there that has a study or something that will help give some idea of the transection rates?

 

I really want fue, but I have somewhat curly hair and I think that could make the transection rate worse. This is a major consideration since there is only so much a person has in their donor area and I wouldn't want any to go to waste.

 

I really don't want to have the scar but if there is a large difference between the transection rates, I'll probably end up going the fut route.

[Mickey85]

I've seen many things comparing transection rates between fut and fue. Some say fut has 1-2% transection rates and fue has 5-10% transection rates. There seems to be a lack of information. I know it varies from doctor to doctor but there must be some generalities.

 

Is there anyone out there that has a study or something that will help give some idea of the transection rates?

 

I really want fue, but I have somewhat curly hair and I think that could make the transection rate worse. This is a major consideration since there is only so much a person has in their donor area and I wouldn't want any to go to waste.

 

I really don't want to have the scar but if there is a large difference between the transection rates, I'll probably end up going the fut route.

 

In general, FUE is harder to master given the circumstances that are intrinsic in the method itself. However the yield is dependent largely on doctor/clinic skill. You have several surgeons who get FUE yield as good as even the best strip results. I have even results from Lorenzo, Bisanga and Erdogan which are better than some very renowned strip surgeons like Feller, Bernstein, Carmen etc. This shows that the yield CAN be as good if not better than strip(not a rule of course). However there are alot of clinics out there that I would NOT go to for FUE. I believe most clinics have not yet become adept at FUE. I would only be comfortable going to the very best FUE surgeons for FUE. I would certainly not chance it with a clinic(recommended or not) that predominantly performs strip. Lorenzo, Bisanga, Feriduni, Erdogan, Hakan, Reddy, Maras and Mwamba are in my opinion the best FUE surgeons in the world and they just happen to perform FUE either exclusively or predominately. They took the time to master FUE rather than use it sparingly for small cases. There are more clinics out there more proficient at strip than there are clinics proficient at FUE.

 

I could show you surgeon's claims on transection rates but they are all hyperbole. Claims like less than 4% transection(from both strip and FUE surgeons) are baseless and merely for promotional and marketing purposes. There have been no public studies shown as far as I am aware. When the SAFE FUE motorized device came out, Dr Harris claimed it had less than 4% transection rate.. The results in general were unimpressive and far from 96% yield. When the ARTAS came out, the same claim was made, less than 4% transection rate. As of today, we still have not seen a 96% yield result from the ARTAS, in fact we have seen several failed ones and disappointed patients. What is funny is that Dr Harris endorsed both the SAFE system and the ARTAS. So if the SAFE system really did have only 4% transection, why did he jump on to promote the ARTAS when its transection rate is the exact same? I'll let you make up your own mind on that one. The real studies are in the results. The bad news is that every single surgeon has a percentage of results that are unsuccessful and by undergoing a procedure, you are rolling the dice really. Chances are if you go to a great surgeon your result will be good, very good even. But there is always that chance it won't take...

Edited May 24, 2014 by Mickey85

[Blake Bloxham]

Joe,

 

Mickey did an excellent job describing some of the issues surrounding FUE transection rates. In general, strip carries a lower rate of transection. I'm not certain whether this is less than 4%, like Mickey said, but the general consensus is that good strip yield is "95%." In the right hands, FUE has excellent yield. In my opinion, it likely rivals strip. However, it is inherently more complicated and precise, so transection increases greatly in the hands of an inexperienced physician.

[Loags79]

I wpuld describe FUT and FUE this way.

 

FUT: almost all transections will occur during the strip harvest as this is the only blind moment for this procedure. Good surgeons who master strip incisions and careful not to transect during the strip will have very mimimal grafts transected. When the strip is divided in follicular units its highly improbable that any folliciles are damaged as they are completely viewed by eye under magnification. Advantage of FUT is that more grafts can be extracted with statistical less transection rate.

 

FUE: each follicular extraction is technically done blind. Of course most follicles direction of growth can be predicted by the surgeon but not all of them, some can be as curved as a "C". Each and evey follicular extraction has a small inherent risk of transection. Advantage is that you dont have a linear scar and recovery time is quicker.