Jump to content

How is donor quality measured?


Recommended Posts

  • Senior Member

Happy new year to you all,

 

I'm wondering if you could help me understand the quality of the donor area.

 

I've seen lots of people refer to measurements and technical ways of describing the quality of the donor area, but I don't quite know what people are referring to. I guess it has something to do with average thickness of each hair, and number of hairs per cm squared? Would anyone be able to spell out how donor quality it measured?

 

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

It is measured by firstly density which is number of hairs or more importantly follicular units per cm2. Secondly you are considering hair texture or caliber how thick your hair is? ie coarse or fine.

 

You would also need to consider laxity if your are looking at FUT. Wavy/curly hair can also provide better coverage to straight hair. One thing you cannot judge that well from photos alone is the size of the recipient area do you have a large head or a small head etc. This is important to not just the recipient but also the donor area as the larger the donor area the more grafts you will be able to harvest.

 

Other factors like miniaturization in the donor area and number of multi hair units compared to single hairs will also be considered when the overall donor area is measured.

 

Best to have some in person consultations to determine these factors as photos alone will not.

---

Former patient and representative for Hasson & Wong.

 

Dr. Victor Hasson and Dr. Jerry Wong are esteemed members of the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration Physicians.

 

My opinions are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Hasson & Wong.

 

 

My Hair Loss Website - Hair Transplant with Dr. Hasson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Can not be measured or evaluated before the operation, can be estimated very roughly, but even this rude estimation may not work with FUE. For FUT, it depends the dimension of the strip. The longer and wider the strip, more the grafts; but longer strip means longer scar, wider strip means wider scar or to take more risk not to close the wound or wound opening after closure as it occurred here. http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/177864-what-happens-when-donor-site-left-open.html

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Indeed what Garageland said. Since you are doing FUE you want to know grafts/cm, hairs/graft, and caliber in microns. I think the most important characteristic is caliber as small differences in diameter are large differences in hair volume.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Out of all of the factors considered, hair caliber is the most critical factor considered when achieving the illusion of coverage. IMHO, we can easily get caught up with the density factor and although it is important, the attempt to achieve an ambiguously high density level is not a wise approach.

 

Let me explain. We all have variances in hair characteristics and even hair quality. Ideally, every surgeon evaluates every patient's virgin density. If the density in a barren surface area can be brought up to 50% of original density, the area will "appear" restored.

 

Further, none of us have enough donor to replace what is lost over a lifetime. Many docs will tell you that the upper range of proposed densities is not necessary to achieve a restored appearance. So why waste all of that precious limited donor knowing there will be more loss in the future? IMHO, this is a critical consideration for those individuals that have the more advanced classes of hair loss in their future, and in their family history.

 

Even with average hair characteristics, achieving a level of say 50-65 cm2 will look good on most individuals. Increasing the level by another 20-25% does not make that much notable "visual" difference in coverage. So if an individual was to start there as the base goal, and then was not satisfied, the density can be increased in the future. Yet if he is satisfied with the visual results, you have more donor left to go around.

 

Surgical hair restoration was never premised to achieve density. It was always oriented around the goal of achieving "visual" restoration. And there is a world of difference between those two approaches.

Gillenator

Independent Patient Advocate

I am not a physician and not employed by any doctor/clinic. My opinions are not medical advice, but are my own views which you read at your own risk.

Supporting Physicians: Dr. Robert Dorin: True & Dorin Medical in New York, NY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
Out of all of the factors considered, hair caliber is the most critical factor considered when achieving the illusion of coverage. IMHO, we can easily get caught up with the density factor and although it is important, the attempt to achieve an ambiguously high density level is not a wise approach.

 

Let me explain. We all have variances in hair characteristics and even hair quality. Ideally, every surgeon evaluates every patient's virgin density. If the density in a barren surface area can be brought up to 50% of original density, the area will "appear" restored.

 

Further, none of us have enough donor to replace what is lost over a lifetime. Many docs will tell you that the upper range of proposed densities is not necessary to achieve a restored appearance. So why waste all of that precious limited donor knowing there will be more loss in the future? IMHO, this is a critical consideration for those individuals that have the more advanced classes of hair loss in their future, and in their family history.

 

Even with average hair characteristics, achieving a level of say 50-65 cm2 will look good on most individuals. Increasing the level by another 20-25% does not make that much notable "visual" difference in coverage. So if an individual was to start there as the base goal, and then was not satisfied, the density can be increased in the future. Yet if he is satisfied with the visual results, you have more donor left to go around.

 

Surgical hair restoration was never premised to achieve density. It was always oriented around the goal of achieving "visual" restoration. And there is a world of difference between those two approaches.

 

This is a very good explanation.

I am an online representative for Dr. Raymond Konior who is an elite member of the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration Physicians.

View Dr. Konior's Website

View Spanker's Website

I am not a medical professional and my opinions should not be taken as medical advice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

For example, if patient a has 3000 fue, split, 1500 singles, 1000 doubles and 500 triples while patient b also has 3000 fue, split, 1000 singles, 700 doubles and 1300 triples, patient b, assuming equal yield will have greater illusion of density and coverage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...