Umar vs Diep vs Rassman for FUE

[bismarck]

Was wondering what everyone's thoughts were when comparing/contrasting the strengths of these docs as far as:

 

1. Overall yield

2. Frontal hairline design

3. Aggressiveness of intervention (ie. closing temple points, lowering frontal lines, etc.)

4. Surgical technique (ie. mechanical vs manual extraction, amount of tech involvement, and lateral vs sagittal incisions)

 

I have been looking at their cases quite a bit lately, but was curious as to everyone's thoughts.

[KO]

I don't think Umar has a substantial body of great results. Diep I don't know much about, but Rassman has retired from surgery.

[Blake Bloxham]

Bismark,

 

What type of procedure are you looking for? I think Dr. Diep performs more "traditional" FUE results; what's more, I think it does it quite well. He uses a combination of manual and motorized punch extraction techniques, and achieves solid yield with this method. Dr. Umar focuses more on the non-traditional FUE cases, like body hair transplant, big repair cases, et cetera.

 

Like KO said, I think Dr. Rassman semi-retired from actually performing procedures.

 

Please, feel free to ask any additional questions.

[bismarck]

Thanks guys, that is helpful. I am looking for some relatively minor hairline work, probably between 1-2k grafts. I was just seeing what FUE options there were on this side of the duck pond.

[episode4anewhope]

Hi Bismark,

 

I just booked an operation with Dr. Diep. I went with him despite having much cheaper alternatives because the body of work he has on display is amazing. Most of it is not on his site though, visit his Youtube channel - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6sNQeJV6BXUysaPHPR7Lug - which has a ton of results (as well as a demonstration of an FUE procedure that I found fascinating). In his clinic he has a huge book with before / after pictures, very impressive.

 

I took an in-person consultation with him since I live pretty close, and he was, by far, the most elaborate on the technical and artistic elements of hairline design. The other doctors I talked to gave me mostly canned responses (granted, it was online consultation). After he explained to me the process in which he builds and personalize a hairline for each client, based on facial and racial features, baldness level, current density of existing hair in the safe zone and so forth - I felt he was the best choice if money was no object.

 

I have not talked to the other doctors you mention, so I have no basis to compare, but Dr. Diep's work is very impressive.

[Cryingoutloud]

Dr. Diep is OK and even though I had a Skype consultation and came away feeling less than convinced that he understood my situation, I find it hard to argue with the results he's put up.

[PupDaddy]

Of the three surgeons you mentioned, I prefer Dr. Diep's work in the four categories you mentioned. I, too, think of Dr. Umar as more of a last-chance FUE repair specialist.

 

That said, I wasn't crazy about a recent patient-posted case of Dr. Diep's where imo he went overboard on the use of "spokes" projecting from the hairline. He does favor a zig-zagging irregularity for the hairline (as do I), but I had not previously seen him use spokes in his hairline designs, at least not like he used them in the case I mentioned (quite long ones, regularly spaced, all along the hairline). I wonder if this was a special case? An experiment with a new technique? Also, so you'll know, Dr. Diep's profile here says he uses needles to make his recipient sites, which would seem to preclude the lateral slit technique. Not sure if that's still the case or universal. Still, his body of FUE work is impressive, and he is someone I would surely consult with for FUE in the U.S.

 

Given your modest and particular FUE aims, I might also consult with Drs. Shapiro (I like Dr. Paul's work), Wesley, and Dorin. All have turned out some lovely FUE hairline work for smaller cases like you're describing. Feel free to disregard if you've narrowed down to the three docs you mentioned.

[KO]

Why not go and volunteer to be a test subject for Pilofocus? Two birds, one stone.

[Noodles123]

It's really hard to evaluate Umar's true capability on a "regular" hair transplant case, because the pictures he presents are always end of the line cases. These are guys who have pretty much exhausted all their options and have been left disfigured by shoddy surgeons. I'm sure for these guys, looking somewhat normal is a tremendous relief. Of the "regular" cases I have seen, I have not been impressed at all and the results have been extremely inconsistent. I can't remember a regular case that could even be considered to be in the same league as a Rahal or any of the recommended European FUE experts.

 

I would agree that of those 3, Diep is the most consistent and has the largest body of work. Where I think Diep has excelled is his work on African American hair, which is typically difficult to do FUE on. Where I think he needs to do some work is in graft placement and to achieve better densities, as some results look a little sparse.

 

As for Rassman, even when he was practicing I was not impressed. He seems more like an academic than a talented surgeon, as his results just couldn't compete with the best.

[Sean]

De. Umar or Dr. Diep, they are good. Dr. Umar has done some advanced level work though, most surgeons do not go near cases he touches, and he nails those cases. Again many docs would not touch such cases due to the level of confidence they have in their own work, so that shows something.

[orwell]

Thanks for asking this question. I'm just starting my learning process about all this and Dr. Diep is in my area. I may set up a consultation there soon.

 

As I was watching videos, I first saw this one where Dr Bernstein is being very careful and slow when giving an injection. Then later I

where Dr. Diep is jabbing one in very quickly. It looked a bit unsettling to me. But maybe that's normal and doesn't mean anything, I don't know. The results look good anyway.

[episode4anewhope]

Actually, the way Dr. Diep does it in the video is the better approach. To minimize pain, you should make the injection as decisive as possible (speaking as an army medic here). If you notice when you do a blood test, they don't inject the needle slowly - you'll feel it much more as opposed to a quick stab.

[orwell]

Got it. Thanks!

[PupDaddy]

Thanks for asking this question. I'm just starting my learning process about all this and Dr. Diep is in my area. I may set up a consultation there soon.

 

As I was watching videos, I first saw this one where Dr Bernstein is being very careful and slow when giving an injection. Then later I

where Dr. Diep is jabbing one in very quickly. It looked a bit unsettling to me. But maybe that's normal and doesn't mean anything, I don't know. The results look good anyway.

 

Actually, orell, I think you are looking at different things being injected by Dr. Diep and Dr. Bernstein. Dr Diep is injecting tumescent fluid to add tautness and lift to the donor scalp to prepare it for punching out the follicular units, whereas Dr. Bernstein is injecting lidocaine+ to numb the donor. Dr. Diep must have numbed his patient's donor area with lidocaine+ injections before the camera started rolling. The patient wouldn't have felt a thing during the injections of tumescent fluid shown in the video.

[m0dthispny]

Dr. Diep numbs the scalp before he injects the tumescent fluid.

 

I know there is some talk of his use of zig zag, after surgery it looks a bit like hounds tooth but once the hair grows it looks good. is it perfect? no, but it's just another approach to make surgery look as natural as possible. i've examined hairlines up close in person, and they are zig zag too, so i see where he is getting this approach from.

 

please see pics of my hairline, the right side looks better than the left in terms of the zig zag.