Should you shave the recipient area?

[olmert]

I had an FUT where they shaved the recipient area and one where they didn't. And let me tell you. It is horrible having it shaved and waiting forever for your hair to grow back. It basically makes you wear a hat for months. You already have shock loss in the recipient area to deal with.

 

How great is the medical advantage of shaving the recipient area?

 

Is it done just so the tech's can stick the grafts in faster and save tech time, or is there a legitimate medical reason that justifies needing to wear a hat for months?

[gillenator]

The docs who want the recipient area shaved are concerned that transection of the existing native hair does not occur. And the more existing hair that is present in the recipient area, the greater the concern because the new recipient incisions must be done at the appropriate angles.

 

Those new recipient incisions are made between the existing hair shafts and it is critical to note the angulation of those shafts as they protrude out of the scalp. Only by cutting the length down can those angulations be observed. When the hair shafts are too long, it can obscure the natural angles of the exiting hair.

 

And this is the same reason why the donor zone is cut down with FUE. The surgeon does not want to transect the FUs during the extraction process so again, only by cutting down the length can the surgeon note the natural angulations of the hair.

[olmert]

So then how come some doc's don't make you shave the recipient area?

[Spanker]

I believe it is best to shave for the reasons started above, however, I can understand someone opting not to if the doc agrees. However, I think the density will be less and risk goes up a little.

[hairweare]

I have had a total of 9300 grafts over 5 procedures and other than the donor area was never shaved. I asked Dr. Lorenzo why not in my case and his succinct reply was that it was not necessary. Figuring out hair angulation on the human scalp is not rocket science and using loupes and an implanter pen I seriously doubt that he was too concerned about transecting native hairs.

 

There is no other practical way to utilize a manual punch on anything but a nub so shaving of the donor area for FUE is essential and not discretionary.

[gillenator]

So then how come some doc's don't make you shave the recipient area?

 

IMHO, it really does come down to the discretion of the surgeon. As Hairweave stated, his surgeon does not require the recipient area to be shaved, and some docs do not because of their own individual confidence to see the angulation of the existing hair. Then you have others who take extra precaution and want the area cut down. And then there's always the patient who won't allow their recipient area to be cut down that short.

 

I should have also mentioned something about hair caliber. The degree of coarseness has a bearing on following the natural direction of hair shafts. In other words, the coarser or higher caliber the hair shafts have, the easier it is to see the angulation of that hair, as compared to fine grade hair. And a wide contrast in color also helps see the hair shafts.

 

The loupe is a high powered magnification system with light and worn on the head which helps tremendously to see the recipient area as the surgeon makes the countless incisions.

[gillenator]

One other thing. It also matters how dense the recipient area is. If the existing density is somewhat low, the concern to cut down the area is not as great as if there is a fair amount of existing hair because obviously the more hair is present, the greater the concern of transection. The space between the individual hair shafts decreases and so each of the recipient incisions must be precise.

[chriswalkerr]

I had an FUT where they shaved the recipient area and one where they didn't. And let me tell you. It is horrible having it shaved and waiting forever for your hair to grow back. It basically makes you wear a hat for months. You already have shock loss in the recipient area to deal with.

 

How great is the medical advantage of shaving the recipient area?

 

Is it done just so the tech's can stick the grafts in faster and save tech time, or is there a legitimate medical reason that justifies needing to wear a hat for months?

 

that's what i am concerned about, will be having the same issue, how have you dealt with it please and how much time you needed to go public and work without hat.

Do you recommend concealers ?

[ZeoRanger]

With FUE shaving the donor perfectly makes sense. I also understand that you shave the recipient area if you place grafts in between native or very close to the native hair. But shaving the entire head and areas that are 2cm from the actual site of operation... Clinic policy... Not having native hair to cover up the surgery was def the only bad aspect of the operation. I did think clinics don't fully realise the stress it brings onto some patients. 3 months of hell and stupid questions by people who should stick to their own business.

[chriswalkerr]

With FUE shaving the donor perfectly makes sense. I also understand that you shave the recipient area if you place grafts in between native or very close to the native hair. But shaving the entire head and areas that are 2cm from the actual site of operation... Clinic policy... Not having native hair to cover up the surgery was def the only bad aspect of the operation. I did think clinics don't fully realise the stress it brings onto some patients. 3 months of hell and stupid questions by people who should stick to their own business.

 

 

Doesn't concealers work the first 3 months , to make it look like nothing was done

i really want to do it but what you said is making me think a lot

i don't want everyone i know to find out about my HT