Strip vs FUE vs mFUE - Dr. Alan Feller Great Neck, NY

[Yaz89]

These are big words coming from a guy who claims FUE has 90% yield, but when is pressed for evidence, he goes silent.

 

As for my argument, appearance is a subjective opinion, you cannot prove something looks better. So just look at the results, and be honest...

 

Two can play this game. The results I see from FUT doctors simply do not beat the doctors I mentioned. Even FUT does not does give 90% yield

[KO]

Two can play this game. The results I see from FUT doctors simply do not beat the doctors I mentioned. Even FUT does not does give 90% yield

Really? Please show me an FUE result better than Bobman's. Reddy, lorenzo, Diep, Erdogan have never shown a result like this. Reddy? Please.....

[Spanker]

Common sense (and most HT Surgeons I have opened a dialogue with) is telling me to go FUT/FUSS for a first large procedure and ensure that my donor area is still intact enough for later procedures if needed. Financially, it makes more sense and in terms of growth, it makes more sense. But takes away the option of ever shaving my head when things progress (I'm 25 and not on fin)

 

Irresponsible optimism is telling me to go for an FUE session, restore at least some kind of decent look for a few years and then either a) things progress but i'll be older and will just buzz it all, or b) there will be a permanent cure or something which will halt my HL progressing, enabling me to maybe get an FUE top up of fewer grafts.

 

Currently require 3500-4000 grafts. Bloody tough decision.

 

If you won't/can't take fin, do you have hopes for a "cure" that you can/would take?

[Yaz89]

Really? Please show me an FUE result better than Bobman's. Reddy, lorenzo, Diep, Erdogan have never shown a result like this. Reddy? Please.....

 

Bobman had 8475 grafts. Some of these docs have given their patients full heads of hair with less grafts than Bobmans. I cant seem to find any pre op images of Bobman. I will post some links tomorrow as I am at work right now. I don't be on this forum 24/7 like you.

[Yaz89]

KO I have been reading your posts for a very long time. Knowing you, your going to refute them anyway

[Yaz89]

Here is one anyway

 

http://asmedfue.forumcommunity.net/m/?t=50277213

 

Clearly you can see how bad this guy was. He has an excellent hair line and full density. Post op shaved look shows how the grafts have taken root

[KO]

Heh. Preop shaved, postop fully grown out? Thick coarse hair? Lower level of baldness?

 

 

Nope.

[Yaz89]

Show Bobmans pre ops then. How do you know this patients hair was coarse? How do you know his level of baldness? You asked for a result and I gave one.

[Yaz89]

Thats all you do when your proved wrong. Refute as usual

[Bill - Seemiller]

Dr. Feller,

 

I have yet to read all the comments on this topic although I imagine there's a lot of debate given that there's over 26 pages :-). However, I have to say that I was very impressed with this video and I agree with the vast majority of what you said. Frankly, I still firmly believe that those who are candiates for strip surgery should undergo strip first and then later, after being "stripped out" should undergo FUE in order to maximize the number of hairs that can be moved.

 

FUE may allow men to wear hair at shorter lengths without visual signs of scarring, but underneath the scalp, I agree that there is far more damage. Thus, those who've undergone FUE will most likely never be able to undergo strip and if they do, many of the surrounding follicles will already be damaged from the resultant trauma from FUE.

 

I also agree that strip surgery (FUT) has the capacity to produce superior results. That's not to say that FUE can't be as effective or yield as much growth as strip in some patients. However, overall, strip provides physicians and their staff with the ability to see what they are doing and as a result, there is less damage to the follicles during extraction and growth yield is higher.

 

Simply put, guys who are concerned about maximizing both coverage and density should undergo strip first (if they are candidates) and then top it off with FUE. The group of people that are terrified of a linear scar for some reason (which frankly really never bothered me) should probably avoid strip and simply undergo FUE and just make the best of it. There are excellent physicians (including Dr. Feller) doing top notch FUE with excellent results. But I agree with Dr. Feller that strip (overall) produces more consistent results.

 

mFUE is an interesting concept. I am curious though...why call it modified FUE and not modified strip? I suppose it's as much strip surgery as it is FUE since you're basically harvesting mini-strips. When you have an opportunity, I'd like to speak with you more on the phone and learn more about this procedure. I know that you've been working with Blake on this as well so I'd like to get his input also. It sounds interesting however, I'm having a difficult time grasping why it would be beneficial to go this route. But perhaps as I learn more and see examples of it, it will become more obvious.

 

The one thing I want to say in general is that it bothers me that strip is referred to FUT. I know I've done it myself several times, but the reality is - strip, FUE and mFUE are ALL FUT procedures. FUT as you said, stands for follicular unit hair transplantation. It is termed this because follicular units (hair groupings as they occur naturally in the scalp) are harvested from the donor area and transplanted to the recipient area (balding areas of the scalp) in order to produce the most natural looking appearance. Strip, FUE and now mFUE are all referring to donor harvesting techniques and nothing more. Follicular Unit Transplantation is the overlying procedure that incorporates all of these donor harvesting methods.

 

Thanks again for sharing this and I look forward to learning more about mFUE.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[Yaz89]

You haven't had a transplant your self and with 3k posts doesn't make you a expert. I aint a expert myself but the eyes never lie

[KO]

Here is Bobman's website:

Hair Restoration Websites

 

I asked you to post a result from one of your favorite surgeon that exceeded this, and you did not. The one you posted shows a guy with his head buzzed down preop, which makes hair look thinner than it is, his hair is very visibly coarse, and he obviously has native hair in the thinning pattern. In other words, the patient had good characteristics which is the most important variable in getting a transplant.

[Yaz89]

Here is Bobman's website:

Hair Restoration Websites

 

I asked you to post a result from one of your favorite surgeon that exceeded this, and you did not. The one you posted shows a guy with his head buzzed down preop, which makes hair look thinner than it is, his hair is very visibly coarse, and he obviously has native hair in the thinning pattern. In other words, the patient had good characteristics which is the most important variable in getting a transplant.

 

What does it matter if he was buzzed pre op. Most people when their baldness becomes apparent they buzz. His post op pics clearly show the difference and my doc managed with less grafts. Keep riding your tail on Bobmans results. Thats just one result only. FUE docs have many times managed to convert cue balls into head balls. Once again you have proved your ignorance correct. Its all about the donor hair; the characteristic, the coarseness and with FUE cherry picking the best grafts which FUT cannot do. I hope Mickey85 sees my posts and will agree with me.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Yaz89

[Yaz89]

Double post deleted

Edited July 15, 2015 by Yaz89

[FUE2014]

That is an epic result for Bobman.

 

KO, biases aside, based on the pics you have posted before I think FUE would be a good option for you as I recall you liked to keep your hair at the back quite short ?

[Yaz89]

That is an epic result for Bobman.

 

KO, biases aside, based on the pics you have posted before I think FUE would be a good option for you as I recall you liked to keep your hair at the back quite short ?

 

No doubt it is an excellent result. Like I said both methods fue and fut are just lay-by terms. Its all about the doctors experience and their ability on their chosen methods be it fut or fue

[MAGNUMpi]

Here is an awesome FUE result from a recent post:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/180199-dr-diep-fue-2-305-hair-grafts-1-year-follow-up-hairline-surgery-result.html

 

Here is an awesome FUT result from a recent post:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/180118-carlos-k-wesley-m-d-nyc-young-mans-frontal-fullness-4534-fu.html

 

Both guys chose well IMHO. I think so much has to do with the persons donor/age/doctor of choice/NW level/and a healthy sprinkling of good luck. It seems that sometimes there are great FUT results with almost nonexistent scars and sometimes there are great FUE results that rival FUT results. Its almost impossible to determine that one is better than the other. It all depends on so much.

[FUE2014]

That FUE result from Dr Diep almost appears too good to be true (not saying it is), it's amazing how the patient got such good coverage from so few grafts....

[HairJo]

excellent Bill I agree with you 100% Finally someone gets it.

[delancey]

There is a very interesting article called "Slow Ideas" published by the New Yorker, related to the medical profession. Read it! Draw a conclusion! Mine is that I would hate to be on the wrong side of history.

[KO]

That is an epic result for Bobman.

 

KO, biases aside, based on the pics you have posted before I think FUE would be a good option for you as I recall you liked to keep your hair at the back quite short ?

 

Yes, I am personally leaning towards FUE, as I've been experimenting with different styles, and keeping the sized buzzed no 3 or less is what seems to work for me. Plus I have coarse, wavy hair (like the guy he posted), and those guys seem to get good results via FUE.

 

Obviously, this is just for me, it is not the case for everybody.

[KO]

What does it matter if he was buzzed pre op. Most people when their baldness becomes apparent they buzz. His post op pics clearly show the difference and my doc managed with less grafts. Keep riding your tail on Bobmans results. Thats just one result only. FUE docs have many times managed to convert cue balls into head balls. Once again you have proved your ignorance correct. Its all about the donor hair; the characteristic, the coarseness and with FUE cherry picking the best grafts which FUT cannot do. I hope Mickey85 sees my posts and will agree with me.

 

Buzzing your hair preop makes it look thinner. Why is it so hard to grasp? This result is nowhere near as impressive as what Bobman had done. The doctors you mentioned have never posted anything near this, or Hasson and Wong's earlier results. FUE just doesn't give that density or naturalness on men with significantly bald areas (unless the patient has very thick hair, in which case FUT would do well too). People are looking at results from guys with ideal donor hair and saying "Aha, FUE has proved it can do as well as FUT". Not so...

[KO]

There is a very interesting article called "Slow Ideas" published by the New Yorker, related to the medical profession. Read it! Draw a conclusion! Mine is that I would hate to be on the wrong side of history.

 

I posted that article here on this forum a few years ago specifically regarding FUE. It has nothing to do with the topic. This isn't about whether FUE is attractive and acceptable to surgeons, but whether it delivers the same results. Being on the wrong side of history doesn't change that. Do you think we are talking about gay marriage?

[delancey]

I posted that article here on this forum a few years ago specifically regarding FUE. It has nothing to do with the topic. This isn't about whether FUE is attractive and acceptable to surgeons, but whether it delivers the same results. Being on the wrong side of history doesn't change that. Do you think we are talking about gay marriage?

 

KO,

 

If the thousands of cases posted by the best FUE surgeons in the world don't convince you of its ability and quality, I'm sorry to say that nothing ever will. It is a method that has been developed, improved upon, and grown in popularity as a result of the desire of the millennials to wear short(er) hair styles. When performed by and under the supervision of a qualified FUE Doctor and Technician(s), growth and quality shouldn't be compromised.

 

--

 

Few clinics can provide strip mega sessions as a result of not having the required and qualified staff on hand. For those that do, there is a clear economic incentive to continue providing a service that it is equipped to provide. Therefore, many strip clinics will have few economic incentives to make any changes to their business model provided that there continues to be a sufficient demand in the market for strip. Even the most ethical clinics believe in maximizing profit as long as results are not compromised. From a cost perspective, the barrier of entry seems to be quite low in order to provide FUE as long as the clinic isn't set up as a large strip clinic. There is, however, a reason why the same FUE clinics continue to provide us with the best FUE results in the industry: the level of skill and practice required is at a very high level. Many of the best FUE clinics were early adopters of the FUE method. It's difficult to compete against 10+ years of daily practice and experience.

 

Finally, I've never been one to question a clinic's pricing structure. A clinic can charge what the market is willing to pay. However, there is also such a thing as setting the price of FUE so high that it is out of reach for most consumers. Undoubtedly high FUE prices in the U.S. incentivize consumers to choose strip.

 

Just my perspective.

[KO]

Regardless of who is performing the surgery, growth and quality are compromised due to FUEs inherent limitations. The fact that people prefer FUE does not mean it will give you better results. And yes, I've seen tons of results from both techniques.

 

The rest of your case is just talk about economic incentives, which is really irrelevant to the merits of the technique and the results provided.

 

Btw, Dr Feller here is an early adopter of the FUE method, in fact one of the very first, and adopted FUE before all the doctors people call "Top FUE". FUE was first popularized in the US after its "rediscovery" by Bernstein and Rassman. So your comment about the best FUE clinics being early adopters is wrong.

 

There is a reason that the best transformations posted on the forums have been FUT and not FUE.