4424 grafts FUT dr.Hasson Feb24, 2016

[Gasthoerer]

Would be interesting to see what was provided by the clinic. Hopefully there was some kind of a solutions, even though I do not see how this could have looked like.

But this is a clear example that also FUT can fail, not only FUE.

[Spidey]

Seems like all of you are more concerned than the person with the results.... Doesn't look good, but placing transplanted hairs in between native hairs is always risky as the result is also dependant on the native hairs sticking around.

 The best cases imo are the ones that are on a completely bald area. At least it's predictable. 

But the case is disappointing, nevertheless. 

Edited August 10, 2018 by Spidey

[Legend007]

Hey spidey .. good to see u on the forum .. u should be more active here .. ur insight is much appreciated .. please give us an update on ur ht.. long time members coming back for updates is really beneficial for us.. 

[1978matt]

I feel like this is a case of permanent shockloss and most of all hairs on top are now transplants.  They were spread over quite a large area hence the less than desirable density outcome.

[JayLDD]

5 minutes ago, ATB7 said:

 

I agree it's a bad transplant but these 2 are not similar cases. The guy you linked has very thick hair, OP has medium to fine texture

First of all, nowhere does it say or even look like OP has "fine" hair,  just looking at the donor it actually looks above average, but you seriously can't make a judgement like that without evidence. To compare just on the basis of photos which is still not a particularly good means:

 

OP

 

Patient I posted:

 

 

 

Not an obvious drastic difference in donor hair quality. Even between medium fine and thick hair assuming this is the case  is not going to be the difference between gaps you can drive a truck through vs close to perfect coverage for the same graft number. OP looks worse than pre-op, this absolutely can't be blamed on hair quality.  You can also compare the post-op to the 2 year result and see many of the grafts didn't grow.

I agree OP likely lost most of his native hairs, but there are hundreds of cases of this number on those even with fine hair that achieved good coverage with this graft number, and many from the same clinic.

[1978matt]

The OP had around 7600 hairs moved compared to the other (10230)....and on the link to the second one it says:

'His very coarse hair played into his favor'.

I wouldn't say the OP had course hair.  Medium at best.  The length on the back and sides can be deceiving.

[JayLDD]

2 minutes ago, 1978matt said:

The OP had around 7600 hairs moved compared to the other (10230)....and on the link to the second one it says:

'His very coarse hair played into his favor'.

I wouldn't say the OP had course hair.  Medium at best.  The length on the back and sides can be deceiving.

Sure, but again OP potentially looks the same or slightly worse than he did pre-op.Also agree OP doesn't have coarse hair and the other patients certainly are stronger, but OP's are absolutely not below average, and there are countless cases at this graft count on higher norwoods with confirmed average hair quality where good coverage was achieved. Not saying there shouldn't be a single spec of scalp visible or something silly, but for that graft count he shouldn't have come out still looking virtually bald, and certainly not worse than pre-op.

Even just looking at the pre-op vs the direct post-op, its quite clear that a  significant amount of grafts didn't grow. Ultimately beating a dead horse a bit at this point though, hopefully the clinic tried to aid in a solution.

[Gasthoerer]

Also interesting regarding the current discussion about FUE: Techs or no Techs.

If FUT can (!) produce such results, even the best FUE performed by the best doc in the world without using any techs can lead to such a poor result. 

[JayLDD]

14 minutes ago, ATB7 said:

7600 hairs is a very low amount considering the amount of grafts. I had 4K grafts and I think I had 11-12,000 hairs, but I have crazy donor density

 

but still, his results look awful. Looks significantly thinner than before surgery. I'm guessing he lost a lot of the native hairs and then a lot of the grafts didn't grow. How is that possible? I thought grafts with refutable surgeons have a 98% growth rate?

"I thought grafts with refutable surgeons have a 98% growth rate?"

 

This is exactly why people should do their research and specifically look for bad results and not just good ones from surgeons they're interested in. Absolutely NO surgeon can guarantee a 98% growth rate, or even a growth rate over 50%. There are bad results from every top surgeon and they're usually easy to find. External and unknown factors can ultimately override skill or consistent procedural conduct. It's why it should also be discussed  and researched in advance with the clinic whether or not there is any sort of guarantee of a touch-up or refund.

[n00b]

Hey guys,

What do you think my next course of action should be?

[Payam]

On 11/13/2018 at 9:21 AM, n00b said:

Hey guys,

What do you think my next course of action should be?

Really sorry about this man, have you reached out to other FUT specialist like Konoir? Did the clinic manage to tell you what went wrong? How many grafts do you have left?

[jcs87]

if all your native hairs have already shed then what is the point of doubling the dosage? is hasson trying to strengthen your donor?

 

where do you live? is there a coalition doc near you that you could see to determine if the remaining hair on your head is transplanted or native?

 

what'd hasson say about the scar placement?

[bismarck]

These types of threads make me fear strip. Imagine going through all that and getting a scar for a negative return.

OP (if you ever return) have you been on meds? Have you been diagnosed with any other medical condition? 25 is so young.

[bonkling]

Wow, I'd never seen this post.

Really sorry about that result, mate. 

Did you ever contact H&W to discuss what went wrong? Hope everything worked out for you!

[John Smith198]

Did you eve heard back from H&W Clinic? 

[Melvin- Admin]

H&W have consistently proven themselves to be ethical, they are working with this patient, and they always stand by their results. That is why I feel so confident referring patients to them.

[TrixGlendevon]

6 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

H&W have consistently proven themselves to be ethical, they are working with this patient, and they always stand by their results. That is why I feel so confident referring patients to them.

They are working with him just now? This was two years ago!! What are they doing exactly to correct this? 

[Melvin- Admin]

4 minutes ago, TrixGlendevon said:

They are working with him just now? This was two years ago!! What are they doing exactly to correct this? 

You can send him a private message, but I know they are currently working with him. I am not gonna out any confidential information he shared with me via PM, but if he wants to share it with you, that's up to him.

[TrixGlendevon]

18 minutes ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

You can send him a private message, but I know they are currently working with him. I am not gonna out any confidential information he shared with me via PM, but if he wants to share it with you, that's up to him.

Fair. I hope he posts how it went for him. His response will allow other people to make informed decisions. This is literally the only bad result I have ever seen from H&W

[killa]

On 10/24/2018 at 4:42 PM, Gasthoerer said:

 

If FUT can (!) produce such results, even the best FUE performed by the best doc in the world without using any techs can lead to such a poor result. 

been reading thru the thread. yeah I mean things can go south and you dont know why in a transplant.

Wish there were ways to eliminate shock loss. noob we wish you well

[lakes9925]

I had an FUT with a recomended doc with around %10 growth (Dr Aronovitz) he had no explaination on why... just had an FUE few months ago with a different doc and im seeing very good growth.

[jcs87]

9 minutes ago, det9925 said:

I had an FUT with a recomended doc with around %10 growth (Dr Aronovitz) he had no explaination on why... just had an FUE few months ago with a different doc and im seeing very good growth.

Who was the first doc with only 10% growth? Did you get a refund?

[lakes9925]

52 minutes ago, jcs87 said:

Who was the first doc with only 10% growth? Did you get a refund?

Dr Leonard Aranovitz was the one that gave me the poor growth, He's a complete liar and his clinic told me bc I didnt do a 6 month follow up with their clinic so theres nothing they can do for me.

[jcs87]

4 hours ago, det9925 said:

Dr Leonard Aranovitz was the one that gave me the poor growth, He's a complete liar and his clinic told me bc I didnt do a 6 month follow up with their clinic so theres nothing they can do for me.

Man that's frustrating. I've never heard of the doc, why/how did you choose him in the first place

[n00b]

Hey folks, never expected activity in this thread after such a long time.

I am working with Dr.Wong to salvage my situation. Things are tough due to lack of donor. Lets see...