Jump to content

FUT is more popular than FUE


Recommended Posts

  • Senior Member
With winds of change sweeping the field of hair-restoration surgery, it had been postulated in 2011 that FUE shall be done in a majority of cases requiring surgical hair restoration in the immediate near future even in the USA. (ISHRS paper, ISHRS Meeting at Anchorage, 2011). With most centers in the world and esp. in countries outside of the USA offering only FUE as preferred modality of surgical hair restoration, we have reached a long way much sooner than was predicted.

 

FUE is a procedure which requires utmost concentration, skill, devotion mostly on the part of the physician, and, often overlooked, on the type of harvesting instrumentation that the physician chooses to use. However, though the technique is being hyped as a panacea for scarring in hair restoration, the mindless way FUE is being adopted and practiced has raised serious, legitimate concerns in the international hair-restoration community. It is alarming that, at my center in India, I continue to receive an ever growing number of cases of poor hair transplants done by primary surgeons without adequate concept and training in hair transplant. So is the case the world over. This has alarmed the patient community and physicians alike.

 

However, to blame the procedure across the board is unfair.

James Harris, Alen Feller, Lorenzo, Patrick Mwamba, and Lars Heitmann have done considerable work using this technique and have perfected individual methods of harvesting to perfection. FUE under high magnification, the use of motorised machine utilising the dull punch of Jim Harris, Feller’s ingenuous powered extraction tool, the unique and path-breaking ‘expanding needle concept’, Patrick & Lars’ laboriously pain-staking but perfect manual extraction method, Lorenzo’s refinements in FUE graft placement and my clinic’s ‘Rapid FUE harvest’ and ‘Golden Harvest’ techniques are increasingly making FUE technique more popular amongst surgeons and patients alike. The efforts of these FUE surgeons have so enriched the present day FUE technique that the method is on the threshold of being accepted as the foremost method of hair transplant today.

 

We have centers around the world today which are replicating successful cases one after the other- it is not by mere fluke that a center will produce consistently satisfactory and pleasing FUE results.

 

This is possible only when centers have successfully overcome the 3 forces that Dr Feller talks about. Are all centers producing consistently good results?- NO! But so is the case with FUT! There are far more FUT complications floating around than FUE even today.

 

The rash of bad cases at this phase of FUE's evolution is natural. When a technique grows in popularity, there will be complications, and they will be even more when the learning curve is rather steep- FUE takes time to learn. I learnt FUT in 2 months. It took me 2 years to master FUE. That is the one single factor which dissuades FUT surgeons going the whole hog in adapting this technique in their practice when they have very comfortable FUT practises up and running.

 

Did FUT not have complications in its inception stage? Of course it had.

 

Sorry Dr Bhatti, great post, but you still haven't rebutted any of Dr Feller's claims or answered the questions below:

 

1) can the three forces of FUE mentioned by Dr Feller be overcome, or have you actually succeeded in doing so? 2) Does FUT really provide a greater number of lifetime donor grafts compared with FUE? 3) Is the transection rate on FUE higher than that of FUT? 4) Does FUE damage the donor region more than FUT? 5) Is cherry picking for FUE really a myth as you still can't really identify singles from doubles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
All i want to know and im sure most future patients wnat to know is the yeild you could achieve. I said a while back i cant remember if it was this thread or another thread that the docs ive contacted took pride in saying they achieve 90% yield some say even more but i cant remember wich one it was dr feller on dr bloxham said no thats not possible its more like 80%.

 

I myslef would like clarification on this being a future patient and looking to go down the fue route. If it is true it might make me change my mind on fue because i wouldnt want to be chucking 20-25% of my grafts away and i dont think im the only one that doesnt.

 

So if dr bahtti could answer that ot if any other fue specailist wnats to get involved to clear that up would be appreciated. :)

 

Thanks.

 

Not just yield, but what about lifetime donor supply going with FUE over FUT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators
Not just yield, but what about lifetime donor supply going with FUE over FUT.

 

Lifetime grafts is a difficult subject, because theoretically there are no lifetime grafts, in advanced cases of MPB even the donor area that is universally resistant to DHT thins, therefore the transplanted grafts thin and fall out, at the sametime not all men will become Norwood 6, therefore technically hair harvested outside the "universal zone" would not fall out. Checking the donor area for minitaurization is the best things physician could do and review family history.


I’m a paid admin for Hair Transplant Network. I do not receive any compensation from any clinic. My comments are not medical advice.

Check out my final hair transplant and topical dutasteride journey

View my thread

Topical dutasteride journey 

Melvin- Managing Publisher and Forum Moderator for the Hair Transplant Network, the Coalition Hair Loss Learning Center, and the Hair Loss Q&A Blog.

Follow our Social Media: Facebook, Instagram, Linkedin, and YouTube.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

Patience, guys.

 

I know of very few professions worldwide wherein the Practitioner/Owner/President can drop whatever he is doing at a moments notice to respond to an internet forum question.

 

Give Feller and Bhatti some leeway - they have demanding schedules and will get to the questions as their time permits.

 

Add in the fact that one post leads to 4 or 5 different question at 4 or 5 different times, replies then get stacked up and cross referenced, it's amazing anyone can keep up with any of this.

I'm serious.  Just look at my face.

 

My Hair Regimen: Lather, Rinse, Repeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
I have to agree..im just a normal poster considering a ht, and I'm totaly confused about everything. There's a doctor writing how wrong it is to have large fue procedures, and yet all I'm seeing on every forum is large fue procedures.

 

From just observing through this thread, I haven't been impressed with Dr Feller's way of getting his point across, I personally wouldn't even consider going to him, even if he was the greatest surgeon on the planet.

 

Without meaning any offence to either dr feller or dr bloxham, all I can take from this is two doctors pushing something, and in my opinion, in quite an arrogant manor.

 

Sorry just my opinion and I'm just a nobody.

 

The main problem with this thread is it has not been a geniune comparison of both the procedures. It has basically been Dr Feller/Bloxham on a business pitch acting as Defense Attorneys for the Strip procedure essentially trying to destroy the credibility of FUE. Whilst never acknowledging hardly anything remotely negative around FUT.

 

And continously deflecting any geniune drawbacks to FUT posters have made in a totally impartial way. When we all know both procedures have their downsides. When a white wash like this occurs you ask Why such An Agenda.? Then look at Dr Fellers book of business which is all FUT. When was the last FUE result from Dr Feller anyone has seen.? We then see a new technique MFUE thrown in the mix of conversation regulary also being elevated above FUE. When no one has ever seen a grown out result on this.?! Which looks like just mini Strips again. You do not have to be Einstein here to put 2 & 2 together.

 

As for Dr Fellers manner people can make their own mind up on it. I will say the comments on Dr Bhatti and his supposed reps were a disgrace and Bill was correct in intervening on this thread.

 

This whole thread has been cooked up as a PR Offensive but has actually been a PR disaster IMO.

 

Stick to sharing results folks and let quality hair restoration do the talking like all the other top Docs do. Or at least lets see a balanced debate between surgeons from both camps so readers are not just getting one side.

Edited by BaldingBogger
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

The three forces are always present but it is up to the surgeon to overcome them. That is why some get consistent great results while others do not. Dr. Bhatti even stated it took him two years to become very proficient with fue. I would only pick an fue exclusive surgeon since they get the most practice with thr technique.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion, the best way to maximize the number of donor hair available for transplanting is to combine strip with FUE. I genuinely believe a patient who is going for both methods in order to maximize donor potential should strip out first and then go for FUE. I agree with Dr. Feller that FUE can cause damage to the surrounding follicles and thus, strip in reality causes less overall damage. As far as which harvesting technique could yield more donor potential on its own, I think this depends on donor density and scalp elasticity however, in general I would suggest that strip yields more donor potential while minimizing the appearance of scarring. More hair follicles can be harvested Via FUE then strip however, scarring will appear too evident if too many ffollicular units are harvested in a single area. Furthermore, since harvesting follicular units via FUE can cause damage to the surrounding follicles, I suspect subsequent FUE procedures may not produce as many viable grafts for transplanting during subsequence procedures, reducing the amount of hair available for transplanting overall.

 

In my opinion, both procedures do and will always have a place within hair transplant surgery. I do not believe that if you we will ever be a replacement for strip as some patients are better suited for strip while others may be better suited for FUE.

 

I'm on the fence as to whether or not a patient should have the ability to pick their donor harvesting technique. Four instance, I agree with Dr. Feller that the doctor knows best and should provide the technique that they feel is best suited for the patient. However, a physician only works in the boundaries of their own experience and if a patient truly feels that a different harvesting technique then what is recommended is best suited for them, they always have the ability to select a different surgeon. For example, Dr. Feller may feel that a particular patient is best suited for strip however, the patient may have an extreme fear of the linear scar associated with this done or harvesting technique. Thus, the patient should express these concerns to Dr. Feller and if Dr. Feller still does not agree, the patient can choose another surgeon who will provide him with what he wants. That of course is not to say that every physician who provides a patient with what they want is always operating within the patient's best interest. That's not to say that in this particular case that a patient choosing FUE over strip isn't what's best suited for them, only that some physicians will operates on patients and give them what they want even when it's not in their best interest. That said, FUE is a viable technique and should be strongly considered for patients who have a strong fear or concern of the linear scar amongst other reasons.

 

I find this conversation very educational and hope that members will continue participating and sharing their input on the pros and cons of each donor harvesting technique and which one they feel is right for them and why.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
In my opinion, the best way to maximize the number of donor hair available for transplanting is to combine strip with FUE. I genuinely believe a patient who is going for both methods in order to maximize donor potential should strip out first and then go for FUE. I agree with Dr. Feller that FUE can cause damage to the surrounding follicles and thus, strip in reality causes less overall damage. As far as which harvesting technique could yield more donor potential on its own, I think this depends on donor density and scalp elasticity however, in general I would suggest that strip yields more donor potential while minimizing the appearance of scarring. More hair follicles can be harvested Via FUE then strip however, scarring will appear too evident if too many ffollicular units are harvested in a single area. Furthermore, since harvesting follicular units via FUE can cause damage to the surrounding follicles, I suspect subsequent FUE procedures may not produce as many viable grafts for transplanting during subsequence procedures, reducing the amount of hair available for transplanting overall.

 

In my opinion, both procedures do and will always have a place within hair transplant surgery. I do not believe that if you we will ever be a replacement for strip as some patients are better suited for strip while others may be better suited for FUE.

 

I'm on the fence as to whether or not a patient should have the ability to pick their donor harvesting technique. Four instance, I agree with Dr. Feller that the doctor knows best and should provide the technique that they feel is best suited for the patient. However, a physician only works in the boundaries of their own experience and if a patient truly feels that a different harvesting technique then what is recommended is best suited for them, they always have the ability to select a different surgeon. For example, Dr. Feller may feel that a particular patient is best suited for strip however, the patient may have an extreme fear of the linear scar associated with this done or harvesting technique. Thus, the patient should express these concerns to Dr. Feller and if Dr. Feller still does not agree, the patient can choose another surgeon who will provide him with what he wants. That of course is not to say that every physician who provides a patient with what they want is always operating within the patient's best interest. That's not to say that in this particular case that a patient choosing FUE over strip isn't what's best suited for them, only that some physicians will operates on patients and give them what they want even when it's not in their best interest. That said, FUE is a viable technique and should be strongly considered for patients who have a strong fear or concern of the linear scar amongst other reasons.

 

I find this conversation very educational and hope that members will continue participating and sharing their input on the pros and cons of each donor harvesting technique and which one they feel is right for them and why.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

 

 

Well said Bill. As I said before, for the average patient who may qualify for both strip and FUE, the only disadvantage for going with strip over FUE is the linier scar. I have yet to hear any other disadvantages/cons. Still waiting for a credible FUE surgeon to come out and state otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
Well said Bill. As I said before, for the average patient who may qualify for both strip and FUE, the only disadvantage for going with strip over FUE is the linier scar. I have yet to hear any other disadvantages/cons. Still waiting for a credible FUE surgeon to come out and state otherwise.

 

The linear scar is a big deal too many.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lileli,

 

You are right, many prospective patients are very concerned about the linear scar and its potential to stretch and/or the inability to wear their hair cropped on the sides and back of their scalp. This is why FUE has become so popular. FUE certainly has its drawbacks but it's primary advantage is the lack of the linear scar. It's also considered less invasive and less painful during healing (at least the first time around).

 

On a personal note, I've had 4 strip procedures and over 9600 grafts. I am very happy with my results and the linear scar is relatively concealed by my hair when it's at a 4 clip (around a half inch). To read more about my experience and view my photos, visit my hair loss website.

 

Personally, I don't feel the need to go shorter on the sides and back but if I wanted to, my scar would be a bit more evident. Not to minimize anyone's concerns however, for me personally, I care a lot less about the linear scar knowing that I have what looks like a full head of hair on top of my head again. To me, the scar I have (as minimal in appearance as it is) was a fair trade off. That said, would I prefer the same amount of hair restored with no linear scar and the ability to cut my hair on the sides and back shorter without revealing a scar? Yes. But if I had to sacrifice some yield to achieve this, it wouldn't be worth it.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bogger,

 

What are the negative aspects of FUT that were deflected?

 

We're doing two FUE cases next week too. Still do 1-2 a week on appropriate candidates. Also, thank you for bringing up mFUE. I think it's going to put a lot of these debates to rest. We're actually doing several bigger mFUE cases in the next month (two I can think of off hand), so we'll be excited to evaluate and present that further.

Dr. Blake Bloxham is recommended by the Hair Transplant Network.

 

 

Hair restoration physician - Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation

 

Previously "Future_HT_Doc" or "Blake_Bloxham" - forum co-moderator and editorial assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, Hair Restoration Network, Hair Loss Q&A blog, and Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

Click here to read my previous answers to hair loss and hair restoration questions, editorials, commentaries, and educational articles.

 

Now practicing hair transplant surgery with Coalition hair restoration physician Dr Alan Feller at our New York practice: Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation.

 

Please note: my advice does not constitute as medical advice. All medical questions and concerns should be addressed by a personal physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blake,

 

My apologies for not having the chance to call you back to discuss mFUE, which I'd still like to learn more about. That said, from what I've read, I'm honestly not convinced that it will be a replacement for either strip or FUE. I also don't see it taking off as a dominant procedure, but I could be wrong. Based on the description I've read, I'm also not sure that mFUE is an appropriate name for it as you are actually taking mini-strips. As you know, FUE stands for "follicular unit extraction". In mFUE, you are not extracting follicular units, you are harvesting mini-strips and dissecting them. While mFUE may be a catchy name, I don't think it's appropriately named and may be a bit deceiving...unless I am missing something.

 

That's just my opinion though.

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

 

Yeah, I did want to discuss this over the phone. Wish you could have called back. I would have really appreciated the opportunity to talk about the procedure over the phone like you mentioned earlier.

 

I've discussed the name several times. It's the most appropriate title for what we're doing. Dr Feller tried mini-strips with another doctor in the past. It didn't work and they didn't pursue it any further. We're still trialing the mFUE procedure, but the concept behind it is actually pretty simple: strip quality grafts and strip results without the linear scar. Like you said yourself only one hour earlier, the only advantage of FUE over FUT is the lack of the linear scar:

 

"FUE certainly has its drawbacks but it's primary advantage is the lack of the linear scar."

 

What if I could give you a procedure with all of the advantages of strip, but with scarring like FUE? What, in your mind, is the disadvantage of this procedure?

 

Here's a video from Dr Feller explaining it further (which includes more explanation about the name):

 

 

Dr. Blake Bloxham is recommended by the Hair Transplant Network.

 

 

Hair restoration physician - Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation

 

Previously "Future_HT_Doc" or "Blake_Bloxham" - forum co-moderator and editorial assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, Hair Restoration Network, Hair Loss Q&A blog, and Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

Click here to read my previous answers to hair loss and hair restoration questions, editorials, commentaries, and educational articles.

 

Now practicing hair transplant surgery with Coalition hair restoration physician Dr Alan Feller at our New York practice: Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation.

 

Please note: my advice does not constitute as medical advice. All medical questions and concerns should be addressed by a personal physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blake,

 

I do still intend on calling you, so don't worry. Perhaps we can talk sometime tomorrow or early next week. That said, I did watch Dr. Feller's video previously and I appreciate you sharing it again. One thing I don't understand about Dr. Feller's explanation is that he said if a patient is a candidate for strip, that he is going to recommend strip because it provides patients with the best chance for yield. Yet at the same time, Dr. Feller says that mFUE (or mini-strip) provides the same potential for growth as strip. Thus to me, it almost seems that patients should be able to choose between strip and mFUE since both provide the same amount of growth? Or is there another reason why patients should not be able to select between the two of them if they are a qualified candidate for strip?

 

I also disagree that FUE should be a term used for anything that's not strip. I think FUE should be used as a term when harvesting follicular units one by one. FUE is a donor harvesting technique and so is trip. Taking mini-strips is an interesting concept but it's certainly not FUE. I personally feel that it requires a more appropriate (and unique) name.

 

I don't mean to sound like a downer about mFUE, I think it has merit and it will be interesting to see what the future holds for this procedure. That said, without actually seeing the procedure in action or how the donor looks post-op or when the donor area heals, it's hard for me to visualize it. That said, perhaps by answering a few questions I have below, it will provide everyone with a bit more detail and help us visualize what the donor area will look like immediately after surgery and when it heals/matures.

 

1. Approximately how large are the mini-strips that are being harvested? How wide and how long?

 

2. How will these wounds be closed? Will sutures or staples be used?

 

3. How far apart will each mini-strip be taken from one another?

 

4. Is there any formula or science to the strategic placement of the strips?

 

5. While a single linear scar is eliminated during mFUE, wouldn't a bunch of mini linear scars replace a single large one?

 

6. Do you have any photos to date that you can show of the donor area immediately after surgery and/or when it's completely healed/matured?

 

I look forward to your responses.

 

Bll

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
Bill,

 

Yeah, I did want to discuss this over the phone. Wish you could have called back. I would have really appreciated the opportunity to talk about the procedure over the phone like you mentioned earlier.

 

I've discussed the name several times. It's the most appropriate title for what we're doing. Dr Feller tried mini-strips with another doctor in the past. It didn't work and they didn't pursue it any further. We're still trialing the mFUE procedure, but the concept behind it is actually pretty simple: strip quality grafts and strip results without the linear scar. Like you said yourself only one hour earlier, the only advantage of FUE over FUT is the lack of the linear scar:

 

"FUE certainly has its drawbacks but it's primary advantage is the lack of the linear scar."

 

What if I could give you a procedure with all of the advantages of strip, but with scarring like FUE? What, in your mind, is the disadvantage of this procedure?

 

Here's a video from Dr Feller explaining it further (which includes more explanation about the name):

 

 

 

Blake, what I don't quite get is the fact that MFUE should surely be resulting in many mini linier scars no? Especially if you did a large MFUE procedure, aren't you going to get a whole bunch of mini scars in different formations? That sounds worse than 1 pencil thin linier scar no? What am I missing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bill,

 

Yes, there is a lot of information that I wanted to share with you about the technique. Clearly, you have some misconceptions about it. I would have appreciated the opportunity to go over all of this with your privately before and would still like to do so at some point. Hopefully you'll understand it more clearly at this point in time and can form an more informed opinion.

Dr. Blake Bloxham is recommended by the Hair Transplant Network.

 

 

Hair restoration physician - Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation

 

Previously "Future_HT_Doc" or "Blake_Bloxham" - forum co-moderator and editorial assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, Hair Restoration Network, Hair Loss Q&A blog, and Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

Click here to read my previous answers to hair loss and hair restoration questions, editorials, commentaries, and educational articles.

 

Now practicing hair transplant surgery with Coalition hair restoration physician Dr Alan Feller at our New York practice: Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation.

 

Please note: my advice does not constitute as medical advice. All medical questions and concerns should be addressed by a personal physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mav,

 

The open wounds start out as either millimeter ellipses or circular defects depending on which type of mFUE punch we use (round or elliptical shaped). The idea that these are mini-strips in comparison to a strip that is several centimeters wide by dozens of centimeters long is a misnomer. We are talking millimeters. This is why they are removed with a dermal punch and why the term "mini strip" just doesn't apply. The reason I believe we will achieve "FUE-like" scarring is the fact that we close these defects and the resulting scarring looks like this:

 

261i006.jpg

 

Or this:

 

2lmmomg.jpg

Dr. Blake Bloxham is recommended by the Hair Transplant Network.

 

 

Hair restoration physician - Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation

 

Previously "Future_HT_Doc" or "Blake_Bloxham" - forum co-moderator and editorial assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, Hair Restoration Network, Hair Loss Q&A blog, and Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

Click here to read my previous answers to hair loss and hair restoration questions, editorials, commentaries, and educational articles.

 

Now practicing hair transplant surgery with Coalition hair restoration physician Dr Alan Feller at our New York practice: Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation.

 

Please note: my advice does not constitute as medical advice. All medical questions and concerns should be addressed by a personal physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blake,

 

With due respect, instead of making a blanket statement that I have some misconceptions about the procedure, how about answering my questions or providing the community with the information so we understand it better. Note that I did revise my last message somewhat so that the questions I asked are more clear. I also see that your response to Mav does begin to answer some of my questions, which I truly appreciate. Things are becoming a bit more clearly with every answer you provide :-).

 

Again, I am happy to speak with you about it privately, but Dr. Feller did present the technique here on this forum so it's perfectly normal for members (including me) to ask questions about it.

 

And for the record, I don't think I have misconceptions about it, it's just that not enough information has been made available for anyone to truly understand it. That's why I am asking questions. My hope is that you take these questions constructively and use it as an opportunity to educate me and the community regarding this technique :-).

 

All the Best,

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. Your response to Mav makes it sound like you are using a punch to remove the follicles. If that's the case, are the follicles blindly dissected like via FUE or is there more to it so that follicles don't face the same forces as when extracted via FUE?

 

Blake, I hope you don't take my posts as antagonistic in any way. I am really just trying to learn about the procedure. And while it may have helped to have a private discussion first, I see no harm in discussing it publicly since it was already presented by Dr. Feller.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member

How about PSE for punch/suture extraction? It's not a strip and it's not FUE.

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

Bill,

 

Yes, we use a punch to remove the follicles. Just like in FUE. And no, the grafts are not subjected to the same forces as traditional FUE. This is why we sought to create the technique.

 

Have you read this thread: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/179637-introducing-modified-fue-mfue.html

 

I'm not trying to be antagonistic either. I didn't mean my comment as a slight. I do apologize if it came off this way! But you do seem to have some misconceptions about how the technique is performed. Again, I was excited to go over this with you before.

 

Let me address the traditional FUE forces you brought up here:

 

Torsion force:

 

Torsion, or twisting force, causes damage in traditional FUE because each graft is subjected to the the full force of the tool individually. In physics, pressure and area are inversely related. The larger you make the area of something, the less it will be subjected to the pressure you're applying. Think of an mFUE graft as an island. In the center of your island, you have untouched trees (FUGs) that cannot be damaged no matter how much strain I apply to the entire graft itself -- twisting the island. What's more, because the area is spread out over a much larger graft, the overall torsion pressure felt is less. Imagine if I was trying to remove the trees from the island. What is going to cause less damage to the trees? Twisting each one out individually, or taking the whole island with the trees and then carefully cutting them away later?

 

And even if the follicles on the outer portion of the graft are subjected to some torsion, it's still less than we exert on a single FUG in FUE, AND you have 90% of the grafts in the middle untouched. What's more, this is assuming we are using the circular mFUE punch. This is turned like a regular FUE punch. The elliptical punch, however, is rocked back and forth. This means no torsion strain.

 

Avulsion (ripping) strain:

 

After the mFUE graft is scored, it is gently lifted from any corner and dissected with scissors, a needle, or blade like you would a strip. There is no excessive pulling force put on the graft and no possible way to rip it away like in traditional FUE.

 

Compression strain:

 

The mFUE unit is removed by gripping the epidermis and no other parts of the dermis or follicle. So there is no crush injury. Because the grafts are dissected microscopically, they also contain an appropriate amount of surrounding tissue and have plenty of room to grip without compression or crushing the important parts of the follicle during implantation.

 

Transection:

 

If we use the rocking motion with the elliptical punch, the surrounding follicles are moved out of the way by a fluid pressure wave the same way they are during dissection of a strip. This is why the elliptical punch is rocked back and forth. We've also experimented with many sizes of the round mFUE punches and have come up with several sizes that allow us to take a perimeter of tissue without follicles to avoid excessive transection. What's more, we are able to use tumescence to help move any surrounding follicles further out of the way -- if we're using a round punch.

 

Skeletonization:

 

The individual FUGs are dissected out of the mFUE graft micoscopically, so they are not skeletonized and, therefore, avoid the dehydration injury and contain enough supportive tissue for cellular cross talk after implantation into the scalp.

 

The entire reason we started this technique was to remove these forces. By doing so, we create strip grafts -- as strip grafts aren't subjected to these forces. BUT, we also get the advantage of the lack of a linear scar. See the above for examples of the scarring. Dr Lindsey has several YouTube videos of mFUE scarring up as well.

 

I hope this was helpful!

Dr. Blake Bloxham is recommended by the Hair Transplant Network.

 

 

Hair restoration physician - Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation

 

Previously "Future_HT_Doc" or "Blake_Bloxham" - forum co-moderator and editorial assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, Hair Restoration Network, Hair Loss Q&A blog, and Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

Click here to read my previous answers to hair loss and hair restoration questions, editorials, commentaries, and educational articles.

 

Now practicing hair transplant surgery with Coalition hair restoration physician Dr Alan Feller at our New York practice: Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation.

 

Please note: my advice does not constitute as medical advice. All medical questions and concerns should be addressed by a personal physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS: I just saw the questions you posted. I'll answer them now!

 

And PPS: I was actually the one who presented it! Haha.

Dr. Blake Bloxham is recommended by the Hair Transplant Network.

 

 

Hair restoration physician - Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation

 

Previously "Future_HT_Doc" or "Blake_Bloxham" - forum co-moderator and editorial assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, Hair Restoration Network, Hair Loss Q&A blog, and Hair Loss Learning Center.

 

Click here to read my previous answers to hair loss and hair restoration questions, editorials, commentaries, and educational articles.

 

Now practicing hair transplant surgery with Coalition hair restoration physician Dr Alan Feller at our New York practice: Feller and Bloxham Hair Transplantation.

 

Please note: my advice does not constitute as medical advice. All medical questions and concerns should be addressed by a personal physician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blake,

 

The above is very useful and begins to answer a lot of questions. I appreciate your time in providing that information. I'm still a little unclear as to how it will all work. Perhaps a video showing a demonstration of the technique accompanied by an explanation would be useful. That said, I can see why "mini-strip" wouldn't be an appropriate name for the procedure. I will give you a call tomorrow or early next week to discuss the technique further as I am truly interested in learning more about it and what place you and Dr. Feller think it will have in today's or tomorrow's modern hair transplant surgery.

 

All the Best :-)

 

Bill

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Senior Member
Lileli,

 

You are right, many prospective patients are very concerned about the linear scar and its potential to stretch and/or the inability to wear their hair cropped on the sides and back of their scalp. This is why FUE has become so popular. FUE certainly has its drawbacks but it's primary advantage is the lack of the linear scar. It's also considered less invasive and less painful during healing (at least the first time around).

 

On a personal note, I've had 4 strip procedures and over 9600 grafts. I am very happy with my results and the linear scar is relatively concealed by my hair when it's at a 4 clip (around a half inch). To read more about my experience and view my photos, visit my hair loss website.

 

Personally, I don't feel the need to go shorter on the sides and back but if I wanted to, my scar would be a bit more evident. Not to minimize anyone's concerns however, for me personally, I care a lot less about the linear scar knowing that I have what looks like a full head of hair on top of my head again. To me, the scar I have (as minimal in appearance as it is) was a fair trade off. That said, would I prefer the same amount of hair restored with no linear scar and the ability to cut my hair on the sides and back shorter without revealing a scar? Yes. But if I had to sacrifice some yield to achieve this, it wouldn't be worth it.

 

Just my thoughts.

 

Bill

 

Hi Bill, in your hair loss website, the link to HT #3 write-up doesn't work. Would love a link to your H&W write-up

 

Hair Transplant #3 : View Post

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
×
×
  • Create New...