Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 12, 2015 Regular Member Share Posted June 12, 2015 I have spent time reading about the differences between performing FUE by hand and with the Artas Robot and I am convinced going the Artas route is the best way. I just don't see how a manual hand can extract the hair follicles as precisely as a robot. I was told that the robot makes larger incisions, but I have read the robot has now improved and the incisions it makes are smaller. Furthermore, the robot cannot get tired and make mistakes like a human hand. I could understand if people were worried about the robot placing the grafts on the hair and designing the hairline, but it does not do that. The human hand still does it. So for what the robot does, just extract grafts and create the new recipient sites, I don't see why the human hand would be able to do a better job. Thoughts or am I missing something? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member ZeoRanger Posted June 13, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 (edited) Watch Terminator and then think again if you would let a robot touch your grafts. Jokes aside browsing this forum I have seen poor results and if I'm not mistaken there are even clinics that first got excited and then ditched the robot (or neograft) because the end results were underwhelming. The concept is great but I don't think the technology is quite there yet. I would not volunteer to be a guinea pig. If the machine was that great and cost effective, everyone would use it. It would save costs and labour... Go figure... PS surgeons that prefer manual FUE say it's best because they get actual feedback when extracting and can adjust their technique. The machine will extract in a one size fits all approach Edited June 13, 2015 by ZeoRanger Info added Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Mickey85 Posted June 13, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 I have spent time reading about the differences between performing FUE by hand and with the Artas Robot and I am convinced going the Artas route is the best way. I just don't see how a manual hand can extract the hair follicles as precisely as a robot. I was told that the robot makes larger incisions, but I have read the robot has now improved and the incisions it makes are smaller. Furthermore, the robot cannot get tired and make mistakes like a human hand. I could understand if people were worried about the robot placing the grafts on the hair and designing the hairline, but it does not do that. The human hand still does it. So for what the robot does, just extract grafts and create the new recipient sites, I don't see why the human hand would be able to do a better job. Thoughts or am I missing something? Thank you. Please look up results performed by the actual robot(ARTAS) before making a decision. Theoritically everything you say is true. A robot can not tire, a robot is precise etc. But some very important factors are left out. But I have only seen maybe 15 results all up from it and most were very unimpressive sadly... The only 2 threads you will ever need: Revamped Advantages/Disadvantages of FUE. Myths dispelled. Educate yourself Everything FUE. Manual, motorized, ARTAS, NeoGraft, physician details and more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member mav23100gunther Posted June 13, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 The fact that Dr Rahal abandoned it for manual FUE should tell you everything you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 13, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 Watch Terminator and then think again if you would let a robot touch your grafts. Jokes aside browsing this forum I have seen poor results and if I'm not mistaken there are even clinics that first got excited and then ditched the robot (or neograft) because the end results were underwhelming. The concept is great but I don't think the technology is quite there yet. I would not volunteer to be a guinea pig. If the machine was that great and cost effective, everyone would use it. It would save costs and labour... Go figure... PS surgeons that prefer manual FUE say it's best because they get actual feedback when extracting and can adjust their technique. The machine will extract in a one size fits all approach I think people are just reluctant to take on a new technology and prefer to continue doing things the old way. If the robot were designing the hairline and placing the grafts in, then I would say the human hand would be better. But all the robot is doing is extracting the grafts. I don't see how the human hand can be better at extracting grafts. Furthermore, the robot can read the density of the hair better than the human hand/eye and extract the best follicles. After it extracts the best follicles and accurately it then creates the recipient sites. It does not seem involved in the stylistic aspects of FUE. Just all the technical parts. It is still run by a human the robot. I don't see how the human hand can do a better job....Again, the robot is still controlled by a human for these technical aspects of the FUE procedure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Blake Bloxham Posted June 13, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 Manual. "Doc" Blake Bloxham - formerly "Future_HT_Doc" Forum Co-Moderator and Editorial Assistant for the Hair Transplant Network, the Hair Loss Learning Center, the Hair Loss Q&A Blog, and the Hair Restoration Forum All opinions are my own and 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 More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 13, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 The fact that Dr Rahal abandoned it for manual FUE should tell you everything you need to know. I see that he is still promoting the artas system on his site: https://www.rahalhairtransplant.com/robotic-hair-transplant/ Do you have a link to why he abandoned it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member ZeoRanger Posted June 13, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 I think people are just reluctant to take on a new technology and prefer to continue doing things the old way. I believe doctors who voice their concerns over adopting this machine. At the end of the day they could do more transplants for less and it would stimulate their business as they can take on more clients. The Atras reportedly only costs $200,000. That money would be recouped quickly by reduced labor costs. My feeling is that surgeons don't want to compromise quality over quantity here. Also read that the grafts get sucked by air which would put and additional strain on them. It's a fantastic concept in the near future. Not now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 13, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 I believe doctors who voice their concerns over adopting this machine. At the end of the day they could do more transplants for less and it would stimulate their business as they can take on more clients. The Atras reportedly only costs $200,000. That money would be recouped quickly by reduced labor costs. My feeling is that surgeons don't want to compromise quality over quantity here. Also read that the grafts get sucked by air which would put and additional strain on them. It's a fantastic concept in the near future. Not now. I didn't read about the grafts getting sucked by air. I know that when the grafts are pulled out by hand, the hand cannot perform as precisely as a robot, and some of the follicles are not useable once the recipients sites have been created. This is because they were pulled out at wrong angle, etc. And in my experience, the doctor I am considering having an FUE Artas procedure with, seems responsible and has an excellent track record. Definitely doesn't seem like someone who is just using ARTAS to make more money because at first he did not even want to do the procedure on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 13, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 Also, maybe the reason we are not seeing more doctors using it, besides the fact that it is a new technology and not readily accepted, is because it is expensive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 13, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 Also read that the grafts get sucked by air which would put and additional strain on them. It's a fantastic concept in the near future. Not now. I read that manual uses suction as well "Utilizes continuous suction / vacuum to extract and transport the graft into a storage vial. This may cause the graft to dry out and cause desiccation.", but the ARTAS robot: "Utilizes suction / vacuum only during dissection process. The graft elevates above the scalp for ease of forcep extraction." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUSA Posted June 13, 2015 Share Posted June 13, 2015 ARTAS is for surgeons who lack skill! if it was so great then why doesn't Erdogan, Lorenzo, Maras etc.... use it? I'm sure they cud afford it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 13, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 13, 2015 ARTAS is for surgeons who lack skill! if it was so great then why doesn't Erdogan, Lorenzo, Maras etc.... use it? I'm sure they cud afford it. I can only speak to NY where I am from, but in NY two top doctors, Robert Bernstein and Marc Avram use it. Anyways I could agree with you if the robot was designing the hairline, but all it is doing is extracting grafts and then creating recipient sites. It's not doing stylistic work. It is just doing the mundane work of extracting thousands of grafts which I think lends itself to a repetitive motion... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member ZeoRanger Posted June 14, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 14, 2015 Also, maybe the reason we are not seeing more doctors using it, besides the fact that it is a new technology and not readily accepted, is because it is expensive... $200,000 are mere peanuts for a successful clinic. That cost would be offset quickly with each patient bringing in a revenue of $10,000 (at least). This is what a recommended doctor posted here re sucking the grafts: Air exposure is likely the number one cause of transplant failure. This is why I cringed when FUE machines that include suction were introduced to pull the grafts from the scalp. At first it seems like a gentler way to remove the grafts compared to squeezing them with a forcepts and then pulling them, HOWEVER, all that air blowing over exposed cells is deadly. The closest thing to follicles that you can experience yourself is your eyeball. Those cells are exposed to the air, however, unlike follicles, there are mechanisms in place to protect those cells to keep them moist. Not the least of which is mucous membranes, tears, eyelids, and blinking. Grafts have no such defense so it's up to the clinic to make sure every graft is constantly kept wet. Not just prior to implantation, but just after implantation as well until a seal is formed. Dr. Feller Great Neck, NY 516-487-3797 I don't know how suction would come into play in Manual FUE... The grafts are cut out and placed in a storage solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Rahal Posted June 14, 2015 Share Posted June 14, 2015 Do you have a link to why he abandoned it? We tested Artas and do not offer it to our patients. Rahal Hair Transplant Clinic - Answers to questions and posts using this account are strictly opinions and not to be considered medical advice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member BaldingBogger Posted June 15, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 These machines have had terrible results on both donor And recipient from what I have seen. For clinics without necessary skills. You should Only consider manual FUE with a proven track record clinic IMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member PupDaddy Posted June 15, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 NY10013, The ARTAS is no longer all that new. It has been tried by some of the world's top ht docs and their clinics, including, for example, Rahal and Shapiro Medical Group. Both have abandoned it in favor of manual FUE extraction, using either standard punches or hand-held motorized punches. As Mickey85 noted, a good percentage of the surprisingly few photographically published ARTAS-assisted FUE results have been subpar compared to what is achievable with good manual FUE extraction and a talented, experienced ht doc creating hand-made graft recipient incisions. The ARTAS is heavily marketed to plastic surgeons and dermatologists as an "easy" way to add hair transplantation to their menu of offered procedures. One of the New York docs you mentioned would arguably fall into this category. FYI, two of the most experienced ht docs in New York City that perform a good amount of FUE -- Dr. Wesley and Dr. Dorin -- both do manual extraction of the grafts using hand-held motorized punches. Both these docs are recommended here and both have published numerous examples of their FUE work here. There is much healthy debate as to the "best" tool for safely extracting viable grafts via FUE: some docs advocate sharp tip punches, others advocate dull tip punches, others claim equivalent viability using one of several variations of motorized punches, some having sharp tips and other having dull tips, and some docs have developed their own custom designed punches or hand-held motorized punches and devices for FUE extraction. What I don't think you'll now find is any serous debate, at least among top FUE docs, that an ARTAS is a better or even equivalent tool for viable FUE graft extraction as a manual (hand-held) punch of whatever variety in competent, experienced hands. Please do your research before deciding on a hair transplant doc, FUE or otherwise. A poor result from a hair transplant can have long-lasting negative consequences and can squander thousands of your precious, finite supply of donor follicles. Find a number of docs who are well reviewed, have published lots of well documented before-after photographic examples of their work (with the tools and techniques used for each case specified), and whose work appeals to you. Then schedule virtual or in-person consultations with each of them. And don't let your geographical location be the deciding factor or even a limiting factor. Many men fly thousands of miles to get worked on by the doc that their research and consults reveal to be the best fit for them.That doc could end up being in your backyard, but if he or she isn't, then (to quote Jay Mohr quoting Christopher Walken), "there are airplanes." Good luck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Sean Posted June 15, 2015 Senior Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 Artas costs like 200k to 300k and then there are graft extraction fees. The major thing about Artas is that since the machine is extracting, in places where techs are not allowed to extract grafts, this tool gives them ability to do so as it is not direct extraction by techs (creates a loophole). It also enables faster extractions so clinics can take care of.multiple patients or surgeries a day. I think it twists surgical protocols for FUE and is for maximizing profits and worth the high costs. Based on online discussions, most folks rather would have a surgeon extract and to do it nice and steady and take utmost care with graft extraction, but such clinics are rare in North America. There are probably a handful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 15, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 We tested Artas and do not offer it to our patients. Why did you stop using it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 15, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 I don't know how suction would come into play in Manual FUE... The grafts are cut out and placed in a storage solution. My understanding is that both Manual FUE and the Artas Robot use suction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 15, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 These machines have had terrible results on both donorAnd recipient from what I have seen. For clinics without necessary skills. You should Only consider manual FUE with a proven track record clinic IMO Ok, but a lot of top clinics use the ARTAS robot. For instance, in NY, one of the top hair surgeons, Robert Bernstein uses it. I don't think ARTAS is for inexperienced doctors... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUSA Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 Ok, but a lot of top clinics use the ARTAS robot. For instance, in NY, one of the top hair surgeons, Robert Bernstein uses it. I don't think ARTAS is for inexperienced doctors...actually its for doctors with limited skill looking for a machine to do they work they can't do themselves.... there is a reason the TOP surgeons on the planet don't use it.... and no Bernstein is not considered a TOP hair transplant doctor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 15, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 NY10013, The ARTAS is no longer all that new. It has been tried by some of the world's top ht docs and their clinics, including, for example, Rahal and Shapiro Medical Group. Both have abandoned it in favor of manual FUE extraction, using either standard punches or hand-held motorized punches. As Mickey85 noted, a good percentage of the surprisingly few photographically published ARTAS-assisted FUE results have been subpar compared to what is achievable with good manual FUE extraction and a talented, experienced ht doc creating hand-made graft recipient incisions. The ARTAS is heavily marketed to plastic surgeons and dermatologists as an "easy" way to add hair transplantation to their menu of offered procedures. One of the New York docs you mentioned would arguably fall into this category. FYI, two of the most experienced ht docs in New York City that perform a good amount of FUE -- Dr. Wesley and Dr. Dorin -- both do manual extraction of the grafts using hand-held motorized punches. Both these docs are recommended here and both have published numerous examples of their FUE work here. There is much healthy debate as to the "best" tool for safely extracting viable grafts via FUE: some docs advocate sharp tip punches, others advocate dull tip punches, others claim equivalent viability using one of several variations of motorized punches, some having sharp tips and other having dull tips, and some docs have developed their own custom designed punches or hand-held motorized punches and devices for FUE extraction. What I don't think you'll now find is any serous debate, at least among top FUE docs, that an ARTAS is a better or even equivalent tool for viable FUE graft extraction as a manual (hand-held) punch of whatever variety in competent, experienced hands. Please do your research before deciding on a hair transplant doc, FUE or otherwise. A poor result from a hair transplant can have long-lasting negative consequences and can squander thousands of your precious, finite supply of donor follicles. Find a number of docs who are well reviewed, have published lots of well documented before-after photographic examples of their work (with the tools and techniques used for each case specified), and whose work appeals to you. Then schedule virtual or in-person consultations with each of them. And don't let your geographical location be the deciding factor or even a limiting factor. Many men fly thousands of miles to get worked on by the doc that their research and consults reveal to be the best fit for them.That doc could end up being in your backyard, but if he or she isn't, then (to quote Jay Mohr quoting Christopher Walken), "there are airplanes." Good luck! I agree that Wesley and Dorin and are top doctors, but Marc Avram is as well and certain Robert Bernstein who is arguably the best in NY. We can't say that Bernstein isn't experienced so I wonder why he uses it. I guess the best person to ask is him, but he could do manual if he wanted... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUSA Posted June 15, 2015 Share Posted June 15, 2015 I agree that Wesley and Dorin and are top doctors, but Marc Avram is as well and certain Robert Bernstein who is arguably the best in NY. We can't say that Bernstein isn't experienced so I wonder why he uses it. I guess the best person to ask is him, but he could do manual if he wanted...ummm if you say so....:rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Regular Member NY10013 Posted June 15, 2015 Author Regular Member Share Posted June 15, 2015 ummm if you say so....:rolleyes: Come on you don't think Robert Bernstein is a top doctor with a proven track record? He arguably has more experience than Wesley and Dorin and has produced a lot of good results. I still just don't see what is wrong with the ARTAS Robot because it is doing all the things that lend itself to a repetitive motion--extracting grafts and creating recipient sites. It isn't putting in the hair follicles and designing the hairline (I know it has plans to do that which I don't like). Furthermore it can analyze, better than the human eye, the density of the hair and pick the best follicles. How can you argue against some of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now