FUT is more popular than FUE

[Rawkerboi]

As we all know the best in one field cannot be compared with the worst in another.

Traction, torsion and compression does not happen in my practice but Dr Feller will not understand.

Scars of FUE are minimally apparent when compared to the best strip scars.

For instance see this FUE case I am doing today. He underwent an FUE procedure around 2800 grafts 11 months back. He is a young Caucasian male who has come for some addition of density (500 grafts only) in the midscalp area where he has started to bald.

His result after one year of FUE is at-

Dr. Bhatti- 2889 FUE grafts for hairline, midscalp and temples - Forum By and for Hair Loss Patients

 

I show his scars clicked today. And he is just a random case from today's surgeries (the newspaper proves that) and not picked from my large storehouse collection of FUE/FUT scars.

 

You can also see the other patient I did a few weeks back. We posted his pictures yesterday-

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/180591-dr-bhatti-1800-fue-grafts-patient-intense-scarring.html

Comparisons are odious you would say !

 

 

The scar looks very scary but not all FUT scars end that way.I have seen pencil thin scars which are very hard to detect even by the hair stylist, unless the procedure is done by the top recommended FUT doctor.

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

The scar looks very scary but not all FUT scars end that way.I have seen pencil thin scars which are very hard to detect even by the hair stylist, unless the procedure is done by the top recommended FUT doctor.

 

I fully agree "Rawkerboi" and that is the gist of my post.

[MAGNUMpi]

As we all know the best in one field cannot be compared with the worst in another.

Traction, torsion and compression does not happen in my practice but Dr Feller will not understand.

Scars of FUE are minimally apparent when compared to the best strip scars.

For instance see this FUE case I am doing today. He underwent an FUE procedure around 2800 grafts 11 months back. He is a young Caucasian male who has come for some addition of density (500 grafts only) in the midscalp area where he has started to bald.

His result after one year of FUE is at-

Dr. Bhatti- 2889 FUE grafts for hairline, midscalp and temples - Forum By and for Hair Loss Patients

 

I show his scars clicked today. And he is just a random case from today's surgeries (the newspaper proves that) and not picked from my large storehouse collection of FUE/FUT scars.

 

You can also see the other patient I did a few weeks back. We posted his pictures yesterday-

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.co...-scarring.html

Comparisons are odious you would say !

 

Attached Thumbnails

 

These are bad scars, but the fact that even the best doctor can not predict that this kind of outcome is off the table I would sacrifice the possible 25% yield difference, go to a top FUE doctor, be conservative with the planning and not risk being scarred like this if I could get away with it NW-wise.

[Melvin- Admin]

These are bad scars, but the fact that even the best doctor can not predict that this kind of outcome is off the table I would sacrifice the possible 25% yield difference, go to a top FUE doctor, be conservative with the planning and not risk being scarred like this if I could get away with it NW-wise.

 

Dead on magnum, the videos I posted were from a dr who had performed thousands of strip surgeries, he said that scar could happen on the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, or 4th strip procedure, it was impossible to tell how someone would scar, thus he stated he'd have to waste grafts to the scar rather than the head. But this gets swept aside because hey who cares right at least you got hair on your head.

 

Dr. Feller I saw dr. Bhattis video, I for one do not advocate FUE mega sessions, but I saw FUE being performed fast. But I did not see the finished result, I will wait to make my judgement once I see the finished result.

 

Apparently any issues brought up about FUT is a mere "distraction"

 

Here's what it boils down to

failed FUE = no growth

Failed FUT= no growth and a hideous scar

[PupDaddy]

"fortune11" speed is the singlemost essential factor which gives FUE in general and FUE megasessions in particular a higher yield almost comparable to FUT.

 

Well, at least there is now agreement between Dr. Bhatti and Dr. Feller on one fundamental point in this debate: Yield from FUE generally is not comparable to yield from FUT. Perhaps we'll even eventually get some semblance of agreement on the quantification of "almost."

 

Dr. Feller has quantified his opinion: He places mode yield (most often repeated, most likely) from FUE megasessions performed by the most accomplished FUE docs at 75% and mode yield from FUT megassessions performed by the most accomplished FUT docs at 97%.

 

I'd be interested to know whether Dr. Bhatti or Dr. Vories or other FUE docs have (a) quantified their personal mode yield from FUE megasessions and (b) could, as Dr. Feller has, render an opinion quantifying mode yields of FUE megassessions vs. FUT megasessions achieved by the most accomplished docs in these respective specialties. Dr. Bhatti?

 

Also, Dr. Bhatti: Can you please elaborate on why "speed is the singlemost essential factor" to achieving higher yield for FUE megasessions? I assume you are referring to speed of scoring and extraction, as demonstrated in your surgery video? (By the way, was that you doing the scoring with the motorized punch? If so, do you execute the scoring for all the grafts in all your cases?)

 

Are you saying that the faster the extraction the better so as to reduce out-of-body time of the thousands of grafts needed for the megasession? Would this objective not better be served by extracting and implanting in intervals, of, say, 500-1,000 grafts? Or by dividing the megasession into consecutive days or with an intervening day between partial sessions? Wouldn't these approaches achieve the desired reduction to graft out-of-body time while avoiding having to score and extract fragile FUE grafts at break-neck speed?

 

I pose these questions respectfully and solely for educational purposes -- not to challenge. I admire the dedication, skill, perseverance, passion, and energy of all ht docs recommended here. Differing practices and opinions are to be expected. If they are discussed and debated honestly and without defensiveness or agenda, everyone benefits.

 

Thank you, Dr. Bhatti.

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

If I believed FUE procedures were as good as FUT procedures I would be doing them everyday and happy to post the results. But I don't for the reasons I made this thread. I've already been down this road ten years ago, I know what happens.

In a scientific debate it isn't the "ends justify the means". It's study the process from the ground up and look for the flaws when compared to another method.

.

 

David,

 

Still no acknowledgement of Dr Feller- that he bears the burden of proof that the forces of physics are as detrimental as you claim. His melodramatics are entertaining but he has not addressed the lack of proof behind his many MANY words. Perhaps if he says it enough then it will become proof enough? Instead he attacks, attacks and then attacks some more. No one is right, everyone is wrong. Medicine at it's finest!

 

I don't wish him to do FUE- Just send validated contemporary pictures of the repair work he claims he does on many many FUE patients. He has one score FUE clinics around his Great Neck.

 

Best wishes.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

Dr. Feller I saw dr. Bhattis video, I for one do not advocate FUE mega sessions, but I saw FUE being performed fast. But I did not see the finished result, I will wait to make my judgement once I see the finished result.

Apparently any issues brought up about FUT is a mere "distraction"

Here's what it boils down to

failed FUE = no growth

Failed FUT= no growth and a hideous scar

 

Well said, "HTsoon".

I have another patient coming in tomorrow for the procedure with an earlier strip surgery done. Let's see how his scar shows up after #1 trim. FUT done by a reputed FUT surgeon. No names. I never mention 'em too.

 

Best.

Edited August 17, 2015 by Dr. Tejinder Bhatti
forgot to add pictures 'cos a picture=1000 words!

[Sethticles]

Dr Feller I have question for you, I have just read your comments on another thread, regarding a reason for a low yield and you said....

 

OR, your physiology prevents you from growing well. The so-called X-factor.

 

If you do a strip procedure and it grows well, you will have your hair and your answer. .

 

My question, how is one to know if you fall under the X factor umbrella before you chose to have a HT and is the X factor the real reason why FUE was developed, to avoid such cases with massive scar damage and strip doesn't grow well.

 

I also find "If you do a strip procedure and it grows well" comment alarming to say the least.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

 

Well I think we can all agree on two things:

 

1. This patient's scar is very very unusual and not even close to representing normal everyday FUT scarring. It's pretty obvious he suffers from a genetic over flexibility of the skin. If he's the same guy I saw in another thread the large wide scars even in the recipient site confirm that.

 

2. He is a PRIME patient for FUE and is, to my mind, the sole reason FUE exists. That is, to have an alternative treatment for patients who cannot nor can no longer have, FUT surgery.

 

I suspect even his FUE scars will be more prominent than in the average patient.

 

Considering the size of that scar, though, why not implant into it? That's the perfect scar for it. Standard FUT scars don't transplant well due to the fibrosis and lack of vascularity. These scars tend to be thin, less dense, and loaded with vascularity-or at least able to grew new vessels far easier.

 

Here's a presentation I did of the worlds first FUE into scar I did back in 2003. Worked like a charm:

 

[Dr Tejinder Bhatti]

 

Well I think we can all agree on two things:

 

 

Will need more advice from you tomorrow when I post tomorrow's strip scar.

[Melvin- Admin]

David,

 

Still no acknowledgement of Dr Feller- that he bears the burden of proof that the forces of physics are as detrimental as you claim. His melodramatics are entertaining but he has not addressed the lack of proof behind his many MANY words. Perhaps if he says it enough then it will become proof enough? Instead he attacks, attacks and then attacks some more. No one is right, everyone is wrong. Medicine at it's finest!

 

I don't wish him to do FUE- Just send validated contemporary pictures of the repair work he claims he does on many many FUE patients. He has one score FUE clinics around his Great Neck.

 

Best wishes.

 

I have to agree with this, prior to Dr. Fellers claims I had never hear of his "3 detrimental factors" when one physician responded to the claims stating these factors hold no bearing on results he attacks the physician and his work, to me that shows a lack of mutual respect between colleagues, he has spoken to members harshly, but I can understand that we are not physicians so our responses may seem elentary to him, but to speak to you the way he has is uncalled for, the video you posted, was that recent? id love to see the results.

 

What really gets me is that the three issues brought up from the physician that can not be mentioned on here got zero responses as if they do not exist, there was actual video evidence that showed the hair growing in different directions, but the three detrimental factors can not be supported with out evidence which has not been presented in any way.

[1978matt]

I see a lot of WMDs are in play: weapons of mass distraction.

 

FUT performed on the right candidates would never end up as bad as that. Picking out a terrible result from a third world doctor is just your typical scare tactic.

 

I could go on google and pick out equally bad FUE but I wont.

[Melvin- Admin]

 

Well I think we can all agree on two things:

 

1. This patient's scar is very very unusual and not even close to representing normal everyday FUT scarring. It's pretty obvious he suffers from a genetic over flexibility of the skin. If he's the same guy I saw in another thread the large wide scars even in the recipient site confirm that.

 

2. He is a PRIME patient for FUE and is, to my mind, the sole reason FUE exists. That is, to have an alternative treatment for patients who cannot nor can no longer have, FUT surgery.

 

I suspect even his FUE scars will be more prominent than in the average patient.

 

Considering the size of that scar, though, why not implant into it? That's the perfect scar for it. Standard FUT scars don't transplant well due to the fibrosis and lack of vascularity. These scars tend to be thin, less dense, and loaded with vascularity-or at least able to grew new vessels far easier.

 

Here's a presentation I did of the worlds first FUE into scar I did back in 2003. Worked like a charm:

 

 

How can you tell if a patient will scar like this? This brings me to the second point made from the physician that could not be mentioned here, implanting hairs to the scar wastes valuable hairs that could've been transplanted to the top. Furthermore, wouldn't the " three detrimental factors" still exist when transplanting hairs to the scar? hair growth is even lower when transplanted in to a scar, so wouldn't you be wasting even more grafts than normal?

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I see a lot of WMDs are in play: weapons of mass distraction.

 

FUT performed on the right candidates would never end up as bad as that. Picking out a terrible result from a third world doctor is just your typical scare tactic.

 

I could go on google and pick out equally bad FUE but I wont.

 

That sums it up rather well.

 

Distraction, evasion, scare tactics, and personal attacks.

[Melvin- Admin]

That sums it up rather well.

 

Distraction, evasion, scare tactics, and personal attacks.

 

I haven't attacked anybody personally which is more than I could say about Matt, but that's besides the point, I'm really interested to know how you overcame the "three detrimental factors" when performing FUE in the scar, it obviously worked from the result you presented, that was great work.

[voxman]

If I recall, this post is about POPULARITY.

 

FUT is more popular than FUE

 

Popularity is determined by numbers. In the U.S., the FORD F-150 outsold the Chevrolet in 1st quarter of 2014 by 102,000 units over 65,000 units.

 

Is the Ford BETTER that the Chevy? You can argue that all day long, but the FACT is that sales numbers verify that the FORD is more POPULAR.

 

So what do the Industry numbers tell us? According to the Original Poster

 

 

 

If every doctor who performed a hair transplant surgery tomorrow were to check in on this forum and tell us what HT surgery they performed on that particular day you would find 99.9% would be FUT, not FUE.

 

All things being equal, this equation needs to be proven, Nothing else.

 

Start the phone calls.

[1978matt]

What really gets me is that the three issues brought up from the physician that can not be mentioned on here got zero responses as if they do not exist, there was actual video evidence that showed the hair growing in different directions, but the three detrimental factors can not be supported with out evidence which has not been presented in any way.

 

I know the doctor you mean who operates out of the state of Georgia. My doctor knows him very well, has visited his research facility and co-written research papers with him. He even uses some of the FUE tools (PCID) that he devised. He told me all about it the last time I visited Chicago...

 

..and yet my doctor also told me that FUE is not the miracle procedure it is made out to be (on the forums) and that the forces Dr Feller describes can be a real problem for some candidates, just a Strip can be a poor choice for others.

 

But I am not his spokesman so you can treat that as hearsay, however, you can always email him directly.

 

Those videos don't really tell us anything different to what Dr Bhatti is presenting, i.e. a picture of a wide abnormal scar having to be filled in with FUE. It feels like a bit of a marketing video for the PCID.

 

The pictures about hair angles either side of the strip scar has been brought up many times before. It could be a problem for some people if they keep their hair very short. But at the end of the day there are literally thousands of FUT cases to be viewed online that rarely (if ever) reveal this to be problem. In fact, I cannot remember a single person come on here for 4 years to complain about it.

[Melvin- Admin]

I know the doctor you mean who operates out of the state of Georgia. My doctor knows him very well, has visited his research facility and co-written research papers with him. He even uses some of the FUE tools (PCID) that he devised. He told me all about it the last time I visited Chicago...

 

..and yet my doctor also told me that FUE is not the miracle procedure it is made out to be (on the forums) and that the forces Dr Feller describes can be a real problem for some candidates, just a Strip can be a poor choice for others.

 

But I am not his spokesman so you can treat that as hearsay, however, you can always email him directly.

 

Those videos don't really tell us anything different to what Dr Bhatti is presenting, i.e. a picture of a wide abnormal scar having to be filled in with FUE. It feels like a bit of a marketing video for the PCID.

 

The pictures about hair angles either side of the strip scar has been brought up many times before. It could be a problem for some people if they keep their hair very short. But at the end of the day there are literally thousands of FUT cases to be viewed online that rarely (if ever) reveal this to be problem. In fact, I cannot remember a single person come on here for 4 years to complain about it.

 

The point I'm trying to make is that concerns regarding FUT have been proven, the "three detrimental factors" have not been proven, but even if they have Dr. Feller himself just posted an FUE case he did back in 2003 that showed an absolute fantastic result, so obviously he was able to overcome the "threes detrimental factors" my question to him is how?

Yes you are correct the physician I'm talking about does practice out of Atlanta and he's a well known and a highly reputable physician as well, the points he's brought up although they may be rare they still exist and should be brought up to laymans as a rare possibility prior to opting for FUT. I think we can all agree that the strip scar widening is unpredictable and happens often, the solution of implanting hairs to the scar actually lowers the amount of hair transplanted to the top, another valid point made by the Dr out of Atlanta.

[Mickey85]

The point I'm trying to make is that concerns regarding FUT have been proven, the "three detrimental factors" have not been proven, but even if they have Dr. Feller himself just posted an FUE case he did back in 2003 that showed an absolute fantastic result, so obviously he was able to overcome the "threes detrimental factors" my question to him is how?

Yes you are correct the physician I'm talking about does practice out of Atlanta and he's a well known and a highly reputable physician as well, the points he's brought up although they may be rare they still exist and should be brought up to laymans as a rare possibility prior to opting for FUT. I think we can all agree that the strip scar widening is unpredictable and happens often, the solution of implanting hairs to the scar actually lowers the amount of hair transplanted to the top, another valid point made by the Dr out of Atlanta.

 

The part in bold highly dubious...

[1978matt]

On the flip side you have to wonder why the Atlanta doctor has not put the debate to rest.

 

All he has to do is get 20-30 patients post operatively, shave their heads close (he could offer a financial incentive) and then use a counter with a marker pen to count the number of hairs that grew, get the high definition pictures reviewed by industry colleagues and then publish the results. We could all bow down to the master of FUE.

 

...but sadly he knows the growth will never quite be on a par with FUT, and so do most of the top doctors operating worldwide.

 

To them it does not matter. They can screen their patients adequately to ensure a reasonable success rate, offer free touch ups if it goes wrong, or just put it down to a lack of x-factor.

 

As long as they get their $X a graft remuneration it doesn't really matter to them. The chances are they will have retired 20 years down the line when you come back needing another 3000 grafts from a decimated donor.

[Melvin- Admin]

The part in bold highly dubious...

 

He's had plenty of disagreements with other physicians, and this board, but that doesn't mean he's not reputable, even Dr. Feller with all of the disagreements we've had id still say he's a highly reputable physician. He's an IAHRS physician which counts for something, just like being a recommended physician on here. I know how you feel about spencer etc. I don't agree same could be said about Bill.

[Mickey85]

He's had plenty of disagreements with other physicians, and this board, but that doesn't mean he's not reputable, even Dr. Feller with all of the disagreements we've had id still say he's a highly reputable physician. He's an IAHRS physician which counts for something, just like being a recommended physician on here. I know how you feel about spencer etc. I don't agree same could be said about Bill.

 

Oh it goes far beyond inter-forum politics, online conduct and mere disagreements. I once shared the same sentiments.

[BadBeat]

If every doctor who performed a hair transplant surgery tomorrow were to check in on this forum and tell us what HT surgery they performed on that particular day you would find 99.9% would be FUT, not FUE.

 

Really? You're an MD and you are really going to try and get us to believe this? So basically what you are saying is that 1 out of every 1,000 hair transplants is FUE? You've already lost most of your credibility with this forum in this thread but this post takes the cake.

Edited August 17, 2015 by BadBeat

[Melvin- Admin]

On the flip side you have to wonder why the Atlanta doctor has not put the debate to rest.

 

All he has to do is get 20-30 patients post operatively, shave their heads close (he could offer a financial incentive) and then use a counter with a marker pen to count the number of hairs that grew, get the high definition pictures reviewed by industry colleagues and then publish the results. We could all bow down to the master of FUE.

 

...but sadly he knows the growth will never quite be on a par with FUT, and so do most of the top doctors operating worldwide.

 

To them it does not matter. They can screen their patients adequately to ensure a reasonable success rate, offer free touch ups if it goes wrong, or just put it down to a lack of x-factor.

 

As long as they get their $X a graft remuneration it doesn't really matter to them. The chances are they will have retired 20 years down the line when you come back needing another 3000 grafts from a decimated donor.

 

Studies conducted by one physician would never hold any bearing, it has to be studies conducted by a third party that has no financial incentive, he has a study that showed he grew 96 grafts out of 100 take it for what it's worth. That still doesn't answer the question as to how Dr. Feller was able to overcome the three detrimental factors on the result he posted in 2003, did he take out more grafts than necessary to make up for the lack of "growth" I'm very interested in knowing how he did it. As for as needing more grafts the same could be said about FUT there is no fail proof surgery doesn't exist MPB is progressive no matter if you're on finasteride with RU and minoxidil it still will progress and there is still a chance you'll need another surgery, so what if you're stripped out? You'll have to do FUE at the risk that the ugly scar will become visible but by that time the surgeon you went to will more than likely retired. The reason FUT doesn't die out is cause it's cheaper, and you can safely harvest mega sessions, with FUE you'll have to have more surgeries because it's only safe to do 2,500 grafts at a single time that's my opinion, but the overall aesthetic result of the surgery will always be superior.

 

Oh it goes far beyond inter-forum politics, online conduct and mere disagreements. I once shared the same sentiments.

 

Hmm pm me I'm interested to know.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Really? You're an MD and you are really going to try and get us to believe this? So basically what you are saying is that 1 out of every 1,000 hair transplants is FUE? You've already lost most of your credibility with this forum in this thread but this post takes the cake.

 

I think you meant 1 out of every 99

 

Does anybody even read the first post of this thread ? This clearly explains why.