How would you define a 'poor grower' ?

[NewHare]

I've had two ht's in the past few years by two coalition drs and at least in my opinion the results were less than satisfactory. And have had four prior to that for a total of six. The first four (80's plugs) actually grew in well.

 

I'm wondering now if I could just be or have become a 'poor grower' (is that even a word....) anyway, if that is the case is there a way to actually determine this as I'm contemplating another procedure. However if my results are similar to the last two I see no point to the expense and time expended.

 

If so, exactly how would a doctor determine this ?

 

Thanks...

[Bill - Seemiller]

This is an interesting question. There is a definite difference between a slow grower and a porker hour. Ultimately, even if somebody has slow growth but after 18 months of teens 90% or higher growth healed, I'd say they were an optimal grow or just a slow grower. But for someone to obtain pork roast, I'd suggest that a large portion of the grafts did not grow for whatever reason. I don't think I could give a percentage that matches with the word "poor". Ultimately, I'd suggest anything 90% or above is optimal but there are many shades of gray so to speak when it comes to growth. I could probably be satisfied with 80% growth especially if I underwent FUE surgery but anything less than that, I would be less than satisfied. If I had 60% or less growth, I would say that's pretty bad.

 

Best wishes,

 

Bill

[NewHare]

Thanks for the response Bill. I'd be very interested in knowing if a doc could make a determination if I were in fact a bad candidate for ht, or was it just poor technique by the doctors I went to. I see no point in going through this again, after two very disappointing procedures.