What's the deal with this HT scar?

[ru5884111]

This guy's a rapper who used to be a norwood 3 and definitely had a transplant (or several). But what's the deal with this FUT scar? Don't they usually wrap ear-to-ear? And why is there another small scar below the main strip scar?

[JeffC45]

Who is this? What's his name?

[Transhair]

Maybe he didn't get many grafts, so the scar was small? The dot underneath might be an area where the stitches unfortunately killed some hair.

[NEWHAIRPLEASE]

That guy has a FULL head of hair…Im doubting either of those are HT scars..

[jkm3]

That's MGK (Machine Gun Kelly) and he did not have a full head of hair like the above user stated. He has actually been losing his hair for the last at least 5 years. He kept his bangs down to not expose his frontal loss. He also frequently wore bandanas to cover that area. He got an excellent transplant. I bet Dr. Rahal or Dr. Feller did it.

 

I noticed this about him when I myself started battling significant thinning ans started looking into treatments and transplants. I'm thinking he had an FUT procedure and was lucky that the scar didn't stretch much at all.

[ru5884111]

For people wondering, his hairline a few years ago: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/AXU2v6jFTtI/maxresdefault.jpg

 

Thanks for explaining all that, jkm3. I've looked around at the dude's interviews and stuff a lot because I don't see a lot of people growing their hair out post-transplant and I wanna know how it looks. Seems like most of the time his hair looks absolutely fantastic. Unfortunately other times it's more like https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/thumbs/0116EA450A1104914742239490048_1e3effe0da6.4.7.11108401508039716392.mp4.jpg?versionId=pWetqbxHgoJPFdpN9e9hd8k58XN.MuPF

 

But he also was a norwood 3 by like...what, 21, 22? So there are a lot of factors we don't know, like continued loss, number of procedures, medication.

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

The top line may be from a small FUT. However, I think the bottom scar is probably unrelated. Almost everyone has little scars like this on their scalp. Bumps on the head and things from childhood! Most never realize it until they really buzz down (we frequently discover them during transplant procedures).

 

I don't think the bottom scar would be from sutures or anything like that. I wouldn't expect the top scar to look like that if this were the case, nor would I only expect there to be that single little one there.

 

As far as the length of the strip is concerned ...

 

Incision lines can be this short if you are going for a limited number of grafts. Most of the time they are longer, however, for two reasons: 1) seeking more grafts; 2) going "long and thin" on the strip instead of "short and wide" so it closes up well into that fine line we shoot for.

[NEWHAIRPLEASE]

That's MGK (Machine Gun Kelly) and he did not have a full head of hair like the above user stated. He has actually been losing his hair for the last at least 5 years. He kept his bangs down to not expose his frontal loss. He also frequently wore bandanas to cover that area. He got an excellent transplant. I bet Dr. Rahal or Dr. Feller did it.

 

I noticed this about him when I myself started battling significant thinning ans started looking into treatments and transplants. I'm thinking he had an FUT procedure and was lucky that the scar didn't stretch much at all.

 

I didn't state " he had a full head of hair " .... I said he has a full head of hair. If he had a transplant , obviously it looks very good. At least from that angle it does. If Rahal did it, as is your guess, then no wonder

[ru5884111]

The top line may be from a small FUT. However, I think the bottom scar is probably unrelated. Almost everyone has little scars like this on their scalp. Bumps on the head and things from childhood! Most never realize it until they really buzz down (we frequently discover them during transplant procedures).

 

I don't think the bottom scar would be from sutures or anything like that. I wouldn't expect the top scar to look like that if this were the case, nor would I only expect there to be that single little one there.

 

As far as the length of the strip is concerned ...

 

Incision lines can be this short if you are going for a limited number of grafts. Most of the time they are longer, however, for two reasons: 1) seeking more grafts; 2) going "long and thin" on the strip instead of "short and wide" so it closes up well into that fine line we shoot for.

 

Thank you, Blake. I think you're probably right, because in his early 20s they probably wouldn't have taken too many grafts. Interesting consequence in that the scar doesn't look like much, I mean he can shave his hair to like a 1 and it doesn't draw that much attention like an ear-to-ear scar would, despite not having as much density as he probably wanted, yet still having good hair...

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

RU,

 

I think a lot of emphasis is placed upon the incision line FUT scar now that more practices are offering and marketing FUE. However, I rarely have patients who complain about the line when all is said and done. Most are able to buzz down to a 3 -- and I always tell my FUE guys the lowest you can buzz down before the punctuate scarring becomes noticeable is a 2 regardless -- or do a fade cut without any issues. And I do strip extractions around this length when patients need somewhere around 2,000 grafts or less. It's the big cases -- 3,000, 4,000, 4,000+ etc -- when it really becomes advantageous to extend the strip.

 

And you bring up the most important point here: clearly the guy looks great! I think when it really boils down, most patients would be happy with that patient's growth with his incision line. After all, that's the goal, right? Good growth in the front!

 

But I don't want to derail this thread or start one of those wonderful FUE v FUT battles, so I'll step off my soapbox.

 

Glad the reply was helpful.

[ru5884111]

A few questions about that: honestly, what are my chances I WON'T be able to buzz down to a 3 with a strip scar? What percentage of patients are unlucky enough that they can't go that low?

 

Second, what do you make of Rich Piana's scar here? http://i.imgur.com/PYuF3hw.png

Would you say that's good, bad, standard for being visible at that hair length?

 

And lastly, I feel like I see more FUE procedures (than FUT) which look obviously, before the 12 month mark, like they're going to require repairs or "touch-ups" to get the yield to where it was supposed to be the first time. Do you think that's true? And I'm only talking about procedures with top clinics here.

 

Thanks!

Edited July 21, 2016 by ru5884111

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Hi RU,

 

I'll give you the same explanation I share during consultations ...

 

I place around 95% of guys into what I call the "normal healer" category. This means they have normal laxity within a certain range, normal intrinsic skin characteristics, no history of hypertrophic or keloid scarring, and no history of any sort of collagen/elastin disorder. I tell these patients that they will statistically be able to shave down to a #3 or "3 guard" before the strip scar is visible. Some of these people are truly excellent healers and they will end up with the "pencil line" scar. Others may have a little more propensity to stretch and will end up with more of a "marker line" (maybe 2mm). But this all falls within the 3 guard category in my mind.

 

The most common response I get when doing evaluations at the 6, 9, 12 month mark with regard to the scar is: "what does the scar look like back there?" Meaning that they haven't seen it and it hasn't caused any problems.

 

Again, it's not my style to "under sell" scarring. I think you can create unrealistic expectations by doing this. But I do think the vast majority of post-FUT patients can go down to a 3 buzz, and I do think the FUT scar itself is hyped a little more online than it maybe deserves.

 

I just looked at a few other pictures of that gentleman's scar. I would not be happy with the visibility of that scar at that length of hair. My guess is that has a long history with transplants and a pretty ravaged donor. To be completely honest, I can't think of a single patient I've seen at our clinic who couldn't hide any kind of scarring with that length of hair. Definitely not what we would normally expect.

 

With regard to your last yield question ...

 

Yes, I think this is true. And for the simple reason that FUE yields are lower on average. I still contend that the average yield is around 72-75%. I think you'll see more and more "studies" arguing that it's on par with FUT on average, but these investigators usually have some pretty irrefutable bias and I've simply seen too much data with my own two eyes to believe otherwise (and not saying it can't reach FUT yields in SOME cases; but not on average). Not trying to bash or belittle the technique in general, but I think your observations are valid.

 

Hope this helps!

[MAGNUMpi]

I think his HT looks terrible

https://v.cdn.vine.co/r/thumbs/0116E...9hd8k58XN.MuPF

That looks really bad to me.

100% detectable.

[ru5884111]

Blake, thanks so much for that thorough explanation. It means a lot that you answer specific questions without being roundabout.

 

I admit I can't seem to totally give up on the idea of FUE.

 

So IS it common for patients to come in 12-14 months after an FUE for a touchup? Maybe even expected? And most importantly, AFTER these touchup cases, how do the patients compare to FUT cases?

 

Like if, for example, I was dead-set on FUE, and basically expected that 12-14 months after that FUE I'd have to come in and get maybe 500 more grafts to finalize it, would I be as good off (as far as density) as if I had just gone with FUT once? Or would I just never have a hairline as dense as a strip procedure, touchup or not?