Feller and Bloxham

[mikeyhwk]

FUE should be reserved for patients who simply cannot have FUT.

 

FUT should be the first line for any and all hair transplant procedures.

 

Doing a 2,000 graft HT as an FUE when it could have been done as an FUT is irresponsible.

 

.

 

that is a big charge, I'll be sure to include that note to any of the doctors I consult with and see what they have to say. You're calling out a lot of doctors, highly established doctors at that with that comment. Seeing as you offer fue, do you absolutely refuse to operate on a patient who wants fue instead of fut, despite being fut operable since your ethical feelings are that you would be doing them a disservice?

[Dr. Alan Feller]

First, I thank you for your unsolicited response. It speaks volumes that a forum post lacking the name of any particular doctor was the impetus for same.

 

I understand your motivation as well as that of any other professional.

 

And I must admit, I have not watched any of those Youtube videos. They're analogous to the medical version of Better Call Saul.

 

And here is an interesting H+W update:

"So now we are in a world where we have two different technologies producing equally incredible results..." Source: https://hassonandwong.com/our-journey-to-fue/

 

Arminius,

If you have nothing positive to contribute, why bother at all ?

 

Posting nasty comments and personal attacks helps nobody, least of all you.

 

Dr. Feller

Great Neck, NY

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I've been calling out FUE doctors since 2003, Mike.

 

I've made several "big" charges, not the least of which is it's unethical for doctors to solely offer FUE as it deprives the patient of the option of having the gold standard of hair transplant procedures which is FUT (Strip).

 

It is every patients right to be offered the procedure that will give the best chance for the best results. FUE-only clinics deny lay patients this right.

 

Please make sure you include that in that note you give to doctors when you consult with them. If any of them wish to come online and debate me publicly they are more than welcome to.

 

As for my protocol:

Let's say a patient comes for FUE but he is an FUT candidate:

The highest number of grafts I will offer a patient via FUE is 1,500 grafts total for their lifetime. And this is IF and only IF they sign a consent form that expressly states they have been offered the FUT procedure and rejected it. The document will also state clearly that they are subjecting their donor area to a guaranteed greater level of damage, greater amount of scarring, and fewer grafts available for future procedures AND that the chances for growth in their recipient area is lower than for FUT.

 

Anything above 1,500 FUE graft extractions increases confluences of scar in the donor area so precipitously that an ethical doctor could not justify it over that of a linear scar.

 

Since you are a fan of writing things down I suggest you ask your FUE doctors to commit the following to writing:

1. My FUE grafts experience no more trauma than properly performed FUT grafts do.

2. My FUE grafts grow as well as my FUT grafts and I have no reason to think otherwise.

3. The damage to the grafts during the extraction process for FUE is the same as for FUT.

4. The amount of damage to the neighboring grafts in FUE is the same as for FUT.

5. The amount of scarring in the donor area produced by FUE is less than that for an equivalent sized FUT.

6. The expected growth for an FUE graft is the same as that for FUT grafts.

7. The general growth yields for FUE procedures are the same as that for FUT procedures.

 

See if they will sign a document containing those 7 items before performing the procedure. Please get back to us with the names of those FUE doctors who will.

 

Thank you,

Dr. Feller

Great Neck, NY

[mikeyhwk]

I've been calling out FUE doctors since 2003, Mike.

 

I've made several "big" charges, not the least of which is it's unethical for doctors to solely offer FUE as it deprives the patient of the option of having the gold standard of hair transplant procedures which is FUT (Strip).

 

It is every patients right to be offered the procedure that will give the best chance for the best results. FUE-only clinics deny lay patients this right.

 

Please make sure you include that in that note you give to doctors when you consult with them. If any of them wish to come online and debate me publicly they are more than welcome to.

 

As for my protocol:

Let's say a patient comes for FUE but he is an FUT candidate:

The highest number of grafts I will offer a patient via FUE is 1,500 grafts total for their lifetime. And this is IF and only IF they sign a consent form that expressly states they have been offered the FUT procedure and rejected it. The document will also state clearly that they are subjecting their donor area to a guaranteed greater level of damage, greater amount of scarring, and fewer grafts available for future procedures AND that the chances for growth in their recipient area is lower than for FUT.

 

Anything above 1,500 FUE graft extractions increases confluences of scar in the donor area so precipitously that an ethical doctor could not justify it over that of a linear scar.

 

Since you are a fan of writing things down I suggest you ask your FUE doctors to commit the following to writing:

1. My FUE grafts experience no more trauma than properly performed FUT grafts do.

2. My FUE grafts grow as well as my FUT grafts and I have no reason to think otherwise.

3. The damage to the grafts during the extraction process for FUE is the same as for FUT.

4. The amount of damage to the neighboring grafts in FUE is the same as for FUT.

5. The amount of scarring in the donor area produced by FUE is less than that for an equivalent sized FUT.

6. The expected growth for an FUE graft is the same as that for FUT grafts.

7. The general growth yields for FUE procedures are the same as that for FUT procedures.

 

See if they will sign a document containing those 7 items before performing the procedure. Please get back to us with the names of those FUE doctors who will.

 

Thank you,

Dr. Feller

Great Neck, NY

 

Thank you for your time Dr Feller, I appreciate the write up and I will absolutely bring up everything you mentioned and see if any doctors I consult with will be willing to own up to those 7 points your brought up. I am sorry if my tone came off as antagonistic in any way but lots of people love to talk about ethics but when the time comes are willing to be unethical so I just had to ask as I knew you offered fue. Whether anybody agrees or not you believe what you say and you stand behind it and act accordingly and that I respect. Not that you needed my respect lol but nonetheless you have it...and you have done your job you've got at least me thinking about what I assumed would be an obvious choice, to do my 2nd surgery with fue.

[Mick50]

It's about time top FUE Docs answered the questions Dr Feller has suggested a potential patient should ask, then I think we would all be happier and more informed , let's just stick to the facts, there actually shouldn't be a reason why they don't want to discuss this publicly if they're sure of their ground.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Thank you, Mike.

 

Dr. Alan Feller

Great Neck, NY

[Dr. Alan Feller]

but lots of people love to talk about ethics but when the time comes are willing to be unethical.

 

Mike,

This is a great quote and applies to far too many doctors performing FUE megasessions today.

 

In the Golden Age of hair transplantation, about 1992 to 2010, the integrity of the follicle was universally held to be sacrosanct. There were articles and chapters written about how fragile grafts were and how they should not be mishandled. Now that all seems to have been conveniently forgotten. What was unethical yesterday seems to be treated as ethical today. And it's a shame.

 

Dr. Feller

Great Neck, NY

[TrixGlendevon]

I've been calling out FUE doctors since 2003, Mike.

 

I've made several "big" charges, not the least of which is it's unethical for doctors to solely offer FUE as it deprives the patient of the option of having the gold standard of hair transplant procedures which is FUT (Strip).

 

It is every patients right to be offered the procedure that will give the best chance for the best results. FUE-only clinics deny lay patients this right.

 

Please make sure you include that in that note you give to doctors when you consult with them. If any of them wish to come online and debate me publicly they are more than welcome to.

 

As for my protocol:

Let's say a patient comes for FUE but he is an FUT candidate:

The highest number of grafts I will offer a patient via FUE is 1,500 grafts total for their lifetime. And this is IF and only IF they sign a consent form that expressly states they have been offered the FUT procedure and rejected it. The document will also state clearly that they are subjecting their donor area to a guaranteed greater level of damage, greater amount of scarring, and fewer grafts available for future procedures AND that the chances for growth in their recipient area is lower than for FUT.

 

Anything above 1,500 FUE graft extractions increases confluences of scar in the donor area so precipitously that an ethical doctor could not justify it over that of a linear scar.

 

Since you are a fan of writing things down I suggest you ask your FUE doctors to commit the following to writing:

1. My FUE grafts experience no more trauma than properly performed FUT grafts do.

2. My FUE grafts grow as well as my FUT grafts and I have no reason to think otherwise.

3. The damage to the grafts during the extraction process for FUE is the same as for FUT.

4. The amount of damage to the neighboring grafts in FUE is the same as for FUT.

5. The amount of scarring in the donor area produced by FUE is less than that for an equivalent sized FUT.

6. The expected growth for an FUE graft is the same as that for FUT grafts.

7. The general growth yields for FUE procedures are the same as that for FUT procedures.

 

See if they will sign a document containing those 7 items before performing the procedure. Please get back to us with the names of those FUE doctors who will.

 

Thank you,

Dr. Feller

Great Neck, NY

 

 

Dr. Feller - I have several consultations in Europe next month and will be asking exactly these questions. Thank you. I have a question for you though - is there are any surgery you know of in which the scar produced by FUT can be reduced afterwards? Is it highly technical? Where would you get it done (in general and you personally)?

[Gasthoerer]

1. My FUE grafts experience no more trauma than properly performed FUT grafts do.

2. My FUE grafts grow as well as my FUT grafts and I have no reason to think otherwise.

3. The damage to the grafts during the extraction process for FUE is the same as for FUT.

4. The amount of damage to the neighboring grafts in FUE is the same as for FUT.

5. The amount of scarring in the donor area produced by FUE is less than that for an equivalent sized FUT.

6. The expected growth for an FUE graft is the same as that for FUT grafts.

7. The general growth yields for FUE procedures are the same as that for FUT procedures.

 

Of course FUE puts more trauma to the grafts. Of course the perfect FUT scar is smaller than the sum of the FUE scars (for major cases). The questions are: How much is the difference in the end and what is a "major case" ! And this should be added to all questions above as it has to be balanced against the risk of a bad FUT scar or the fear of public exposure of a standard scar.

From my point of view it should not be difficult for an HAT-Researcher to really come up with a formula to compare FUE vs FUT. This would really benefit all clients. Formula would be sth. like that:

FUE yield % = (1-Transection during extraction) * Growth rate of inserted grafts (non-dissected) * Factor for reduced shaft diameter of hairs * … (other parameters)

FUT yield in % = (1-Transection of grafts by the Strip) * Factor for mismatched number of grafts (#) * Growth rate of inserted grafts * Factor for reduced shaft diameter of hairs * … … (other parameters)

A lot of these parameters (e. g. how many grafts in % are damaged by the strip) are a function of number of grafts (and other factors like number of multiple grafts etc.) itself. Still we could get a nice graph: “Total Yield” vs. Graft number. If you enter a range for certain parameters like transection rate of 0.X-0.Y one could even plot a range for different hair types, estimation of different clinics etc.

This would make the decision for FUE vs. FUT much easier. In my opinion this graphs should cross at a certain graft number, as growth rate and shaft diameter are higher for strip. I understood Feller thinks that 500-1000 is the crossing point. Dr. Law (?) in the video sees it at 1200, if I got it right.

The scaring effect on the donor below the skin which was mentioned is of course unrelated to the formula above and has to be taken into account separately. Especially when further procedures are expected.

[JayLDD]

I've been calling out FUE doctors since 2003, Mike.

 

I've made several "big" charges, not the least of which is it's unethical for doctors to solely offer FUE as it deprives the patient of the option of having the gold standard of hair transplant procedures which is FUT (Strip).

 

It is every patients right to be offered the procedure that will give the best chance for the best results. FUE-only clinics deny lay patients this right.

 

Please make sure you include that in that note you give to doctors when you consult with them. If any of them wish to come online and debate me publicly they are more than welcome to.

 

As for my protocol:

Let's say a patient comes for FUE but he is an FUT candidate:

The highest number of grafts I will offer a patient via FUE is 1,500 grafts total for their lifetime. And this is IF and only IF they sign a consent form that expressly states they have been offered the FUT procedure and rejected it. The document will also state clearly that they are subjecting their donor area to a guaranteed greater level of damage, greater amount of scarring, and fewer grafts available for future procedures AND that the chances for growth in their recipient area is lower than for FUT.

 

Anything above 1,500 FUE graft extractions increases confluences of scar in the donor area so precipitously that an ethical doctor could not justify it over that of a linear scar.

 

Since you are a fan of writing things down I suggest you ask your FUE doctors to commit the following to writing:

1. My FUE grafts experience no more trauma than properly performed FUT grafts do.

2. My FUE grafts grow as well as my FUT grafts and I have no reason to think otherwise.

3. The damage to the grafts during the extraction process for FUE is the same as for FUT.

4. The amount of damage to the neighboring grafts in FUE is the same as for FUT.

5. The amount of scarring in the donor area produced by FUE is less than that for an equivalent sized FUT.

6. The expected growth for an FUE graft is the same as that for FUT grafts.

7. The general growth yields for FUE procedures are the same as that for FUT procedures.

 

See if they will sign a document containing those 7 items before performing the procedure. Please get back to us with the names of those FUE doctors who will.

 

Thank you,

Dr. Feller

Great Neck, NY

 

No one in their right mind would sign that even if they believed it.

 

More importantly however doctor Feller, you constantly say no layman can comment on hair transplant details when you yourself have no experience in conducting an FUE megassession. Why should anyone take you seriously on the topic when doctors are doing 5000 grafts over two day sessions and you refuse to do more than 1500? Again, there are hundreds of results from European FUE surgeons such as Lupanzula and Erdogan with no visible scarring or donor depletion at a grade 4 even after 5000 grafts have been removed.

 

You admit you don't perform FUE megasessions, so how are you qualified to comment on them now?

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Of course FUE puts more trauma to the grafts. Of course the perfect FUT scar is smaller than the sum of the FUE scars (for major cases). The questions are: How much is the difference in the end and what is a "major case" ! And this should be added to all questions above as it has to be balanced against the risk of a bad FUT scar or the fear of public exposure of a standard scar.

From my point of view it should not be difficult for an HAT-Researcher to really come up with a formula to compare FUE vs FUT. This would really benefit all clients. Formula would be sth. like that:

FUE yield % = (1-Transection during extraction) * Growth rate of inserted grafts (non-dissected) * Factor for reduced shaft diameter of hairs * … (other parameters)

FUT yield in % = (1-Transection of grafts by the Strip) * Factor for mismatched number of grafts (#) * Growth rate of inserted grafts * Factor for reduced shaft diameter of hairs * … … (other parameters)

A lot of these parameters (e. g. how many grafts in % are damaged by the strip) are a function of number of grafts (and other factors like number of multiple grafts etc.) itself. Still we could get a nice graph: “Total Yield” vs. Graft number. If you enter a range for certain parameters like transection rate of 0.X-0.Y one could even plot a range for different hair types, estimation of different clinics etc.

This would make the decision for FUE vs. FUT much easier. In my opinion this graphs should cross at a certain graft number, as growth rate and shaft diameter are higher for strip. I understood Feller thinks that 500-1000 is the crossing point. Dr. Law (?) in the video sees it at 1200, if I got it right.

The scaring effect on the donor below the skin which was mentioned is of course unrelated to the formula above and has to be taken into account separately. Especially when further procedures are expected.

 

Gas,

I don't debate layman and I don't consult with laymen as to the particulars of surgery. There are two reasons for this:

 

The first is because you are not qualified to debate me. Do a few thousand surgeries and then get back to me.

 

The second is because you don't know what you don't know and you aren't going to learn the particulars of surgery from a layman's online forum no matter how intelligent or enthusiastic you are.

 

If you have a true question (not a statement in the form of a question), I will be happy to answer it for you. If you think you know it all already, then you don't need me or any other doctor.

 

By the way, I trained Dr. Law how to perform FUE, performed his first FUE procedure with him in my office, video recorded it, and sold him his first FUE tools (my patented designs).

 

Dr. Feller

Edited May 11, 2017 by Dr. Alan Feller

[TrixGlendevon]

Gas,

I don't debate layman. There are two reasons for this:

 

The first is because you are not qualified to debate me. Do a few thousand surgeries and then get back to me.

 

The second is because you don't know what you don't know and you aren't going to learn the particulars of surgery from a layman's online forum no matter how intelligent or enthusiastic you are.

 

If you have a question, I will be happy to answer it for you. If you think you know it all already, then you don't need me or any other doctor.

 

Dr. Feller

 

De Feller. I DO actually have a question and I am the OP

 

You have made me consider FUT (here and also your Youtube videos with Dr BB). I will do the procedure in Europe though for logistical reasons. Who in your professional opinion are the top FUT surgeons in Europe? I already had Dr Feriduni on my list for consultations next month for FUE but I will be speaking to him about FUT too now. Who else?

[Dr. Alan Feller]

No one in their right mind would sign that even if they believed it.

 

More importantly however doctor Feller, you constantly say no layman can comment on hair transplant details when you yourself have no experience in conducting an FUE megassession. Why should anyone take you seriously on the topic when doctors are doing 5000 grafts over two day sessions and you refuse to do more than 1500? Again, there are hundreds of results from European FUE surgeons such as Lupanzula and Erdogan with no visible scarring or donor depletion at a grade 4 even after 5000 grafts have been removed.

 

You admit you don't perform FUE megasessions, so how are you qualified to comment on them now?

 

Sorry Jean, you leaped before you looked.

 

I was the first to perform 2,000 graft and 3,000 graft FUE procedures before any of the doctors you mentioned were even in the hair transplant industry.

 

I performed the worlds first live FUE surgery procedure in 2003.

 

I produced and posted the worlds first FUE procedure video online with full disclosure as to how it was technically done.

 

I also performed the worlds first successful FUE into donor scar repair procedure and documented it online in 2003.

 

I also produced the worlds first surgical tools designed specifically for FUE and received US Patents on them.

 

I have been recognized as a true pioneer in FUE, unlike just about every other FUE doctor who fraudulently make these claims.

 

You don't see large procedures of FUE from me because I stopped performing them. And why did I do this ? Because they don't grow as well as FUT procedures on the whole; and, they inflict too much damage to the donor area when compared to FUT.

 

By the way, any doctor who can do 1,500 FUE can do 3,000 FUE. There is no difference in technique. Only in your willingness to injure the patient to greater and greater extents.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

No one in their right mind would sign that even if they believed it.

 

 

 

If a physician does not offer all of that information in written form then they are guilty of not providing Informed Consent. The omission of which, alone, is enough to get a medical license pulled. In addition, failure to provide Informed Consent is actionable in court.

Doctors have been sued for less.

On top of this, it is unethical to hide, withhold, or omit disadvantages of surgical procedures.

 

However, in the third world and parts of Europe doctors have no such accountability. So omission of Informed Consent has little or no practical repercussions.

 

Why do you think America is the epicenter of modern surgery and medicine in the world ? It's because U.S. standards, ethics, and legal repercussions are the highest in the world as well. No matter what the surgery is, if it's not being done that way in the United States there is a damn good reason for it. Look at all the FUE mills in Europe and the Third world. There are tons. Now look at America. None. There is a reason for this.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

HLS2015,

 

I do know your stance and I remember your situation well. You are the textbook cautionary tale underlying my own FUE philosophy. Your situation is the embodiment of what I am trying to teach the viewers of this site. I commend you for sharing your story on here. Most wouldn't do it.

 

To answer your question, the answer is no. Even if somehow grafts could regenerate as a matter of practicality after being purposefully transected, the graft that was removed would still be injured and be expected not to grow as well.

 

Today FUE doctors DON'T mean to transect grafts and yet they still do. That's what the mystery pimples are that patients on this very thread complained about 5 weeks after their procedure.

 

What the average FUE patient doesn't realize, and what the average FUE HT surgeon fails to report to the world is the number of ATTEMPTS to remove a graft to the number of EXTRACTIONS actually achieved.

To get 3000 grafts it may have taken 4,000 attempts. But that 1,000 injured grafts is never discussed or acknowledged. I call this the ATTEMPT to SUCCESS ratio.

 

FUE is not the procedure to supplant the FUT procedure. It would take a revolutionary new way of cutting the skin and so far there is nothing on the horizon that I have seen. For now, as far as FUE goes, the fatter the graft, the better the growth.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

De Feller. I DO actually have a question and I am the OP

 

You have made me consider FUT (here and also your Youtube videos with Dr BB). I will do the procedure in Europe though for logistical reasons. Who in your professional opinion are the top FUT surgeons in Europe? I already had Dr Feriduni on my list for consultations next month for FUE but I will be speaking to him about FUT too now. Who else?

 

Dr. Feriduni does excellent FUT work. He's a good choice. Dr. Devorye is also an excellent choice. Dr. Chris Bisanga is also excellent. All produce jaw dropping FUT results ON A CONSISTENT basis over many years. I'm sure I'm missing a few, but these Drs come to mind immediately.

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

I studied "donor doubling" for years. I read countless papers on different bisecting methods; transplanting the upper part of the follicle with the bulge-region versus the lower portion with the DP/hair matrix/DSC region; I spoke in detail with several doctors who have attempted this (and tried to speak with a well-known one who touted donor duplication in a different manner); I even ended up authoring some pieces on it myself.

 

The unfortunate conclusion is that it is very theoretical and not practical. The bi-section of a follicle via a blind technique like FUE is nearly impossible. You're talking about fractions of a millimeter when it comes to removing the correct region of stem cell foci. This leaves you with the alternative to try and remove the entire follicle, bi-sect it, and either implant both regions OR try to implant one back into the donor. This does not work well and would be so time consuming that it would not be practical on any sort of scale.

 

The best study I ever came across was a group in Italy. They managed to bisect in a pretty elegant manner (though not on a scale that could be used to make any cosmetic different during a surgery) and re-implanted the part of the follicle containing the bulge. What they found, consistently, is that when this does work, the hair shaft is always noticeably thinner. What this means is that even when you do successfully perform the procedure, you're always going to end up with thin, wispy hairs. One other doctor I spoke with who had experimented with bisection in the past reported the exact same thing: he could sometimes get it to work, but the hairs always grew in very, very thin.

 

I still continue researching and pondering over it to this day, but I would not rely on it to supplant modern hair transplantation in any of our lifetimes.

[Gasthoerer]

Gas,

I don't debate layman and I don't consult with laymen as to the particulars of surgery. There are two reasons for this:

 

The first is because you are not qualified to debate me. Do a few thousand surgeries and then get back to me.

 

The second is because you don't know what you don't know and you aren't going to learn the particulars of surgery from a layman's online forum no matter how intelligent or enthusiastic you are.

 

If you have a true question (not a statement in the form of a question), I will be happy to answer it for you. If you think you know it all already, then you don't need me or any other doctor.

 

By the way, I trained Dr. Law how to perform FUE, performed his first FUE procedure with him in my office, video recorded it, and sold him his first FUE tools (my patented designs).

 

Dr. Feller

 

Sorry, my mistake. Run against the brick wall head first yet again and hope it will fall this time. I should have known better.

 

Like I said, I agree with most of your points, I just think you are not helping your case (which I hope is helping hair loss sufferers) by your approach.

 

Maybe I will play your game and ask questions, let us see if this works out better.

[Gasthoerer]

I studied "donor doubling" for years. I read countless papers on different bisecting methods; transplanting the upper part of the follicle with the bulge-region versus the lower portion with the DP/hair matrix/DSC region; I spoke in detail with several doctors who have attempted this (and tried to speak with a well-known one who touted donor duplication in a different manner); I even ended up authoring some pieces on it myself.

 

The unfortunate conclusion is that it is very theoretical and not practical. The bi-section of a follicle via a blind technique like FUE is nearly impossible. You're talking about fractions of a millimeter when it comes to removing the correct region of stem cell foci. This leaves you with the alternative to try and remove the entire follicle, bi-sect it, and either implant both regions OR try to implant one back into the donor. This does not work well and would be so time consuming that it would not be practical on any sort of scale.

 

The best study I ever came across was a group in Italy. They managed to bisect in a pretty elegant manner (though not on a scale that could be used to make any cosmetic different during a surgery) and re-implanted the part of the follicle containing the bulge. What they found, consistently, is that when this does work, the hair shaft is always noticeably thinner. What this means is that even when you do successfully perform the procedure, you're always going to end up with thin, wispy hairs. One other doctor I spoke with who had experimented with bisection in the past reported the exact same thing: he could sometimes get it to work, but the hairs always grew in very, very thin.

 

I still continue researching and pondering over it to this day, but I would not rely on it to supplant modern hair transplantation in any of our lifetimes.

 

100 % agreed. I think there is no scientific data which give us any hope that donor regeneration works. If (big if) growth occure both hairs seems to be pitiful.

[Gasthoerer]

Dr. Feriduni does excellent FUT work. He's a good choice. Dr. Devorye is also an excellent choice. Dr. Chris Bisanga is also excellent. All produce jaw dropping FUT results ON A CONSISTENT basis over many years. I'm sure I'm missing a few, but these Drs come to mind immediately.

 

 

I second this choice of surgeons. Personally I had a consultation with two of them in the past, and going to have a further consultation up soon with one of them.

 

My questions will be after the ongoing discussion here:

- Why did they not recommend FUT but FUE for my case exactly (the gave some explanatio but I will deep dive and ask again).

- Which number of grafts is there borderline between FUE and FUT (in average) in their opinion

 

By the way and without judging the methods by this statement: Both of them told me that their majority of work is FUE today. Only one mentioned a number (or maybe from only one I recall) and it was > 90 %.

[TrixGlendevon]

I second this choice of surgeons. Personally I had a consultation with two of them in the past, and going to have a further consultation up soon with one of them.

 

My questions will be after the ongoing discussion here:

- Why did they not recommend FUT but FUE for my case exactly (the gave some explanatio but I will deep dive and ask again).

- Which number of grafts is there borderline between FUE and FUT (in average) in their opinion

 

By the way and without judging the methods by this statement: Both of them told me that their majority of work is FUE today. Only one mentioned a number (or maybe from only one I recall) and it was > 90 %.

 

Which 2 did you see? I am guessing the two Belgians? Which are you going back to and why?

[Gasthoerer]

Which 2 did you see? I am guessing the two Belgians? Which are you going back to and why?

 

All of them are in belgium but one is technically a german ;-)

I visited Bisanga and Feriduni and will go for a second visit to Feriduni (right around my corner so to say).

 

Because I am a difficult case (DPA with bad hair/skin contrast and low hairline), I am planning carefully. I have to decide between several options to start (Front and top, only front, only front in a very conservative way). FUT or FUE depends also on the options I pick. Therfore I am going back to check, after now 2 years on meds, how stable the loss is and which option is best.

[TrixGlendevon]

All of them are in belgium but one is technically a german ;-)

I visited Bisanga and Feriduni and will go for a second visit to Feriduni (right around my corner so to say).

 

Because I am a difficult case (DPA with bad hair/skin contrast and low hairline), I am planning carefully. I have to decide between several options to start (Front and top, only front, only front in a very conservative way). FUT or FUE depends also on the options I pick. Therfore I am going back to check, after now 2 years on meds, how stable the loss is and which option is best.

 

I thought Dr. Devorye was based in France? I know Dr. Feriduni is German. I am trying to get an appointment to see him in June when I am back in Europe but so far he is fully booked up! I am also between FUE and FUT after this thread. I will let the doctor decide for me. I am not sure if my scalp laxity is good or not as it feels quite tight to me but the doctor will know for sure.

 

I have a "tuft" which is the perfect height above my eyebrows apparently but Dr. Feriduni also told me I should leave it for another year or two for the frontal third and until I am 35 (3 years) for the crown. This is why I want to see him in person (along with other doctors from my short list).

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I second this choice of surgeons. Personally I had a consultation with two of them in the past, and going to have a further consultation up soon with one of them.

 

My questions will be after the ongoing discussion here:

- Why did they not recommend FUT but FUE for my case exactly (the gave some explanatio but I will deep dive and ask again).

- Which number of grafts is there borderline between FUE and FUT (in average) in their opinion

 

By the way and without judging the methods by this statement: Both of them told me that their majority of work is FUE today. Only one mentioned a number (or maybe from only one I recall) and it was > 90 %.

 

Gas,

Would you be interested in doing a three way phone call with any or all of these doctors you have been quoting? Let's recording it and then post the recording right here on this forum for everyone to listen to. I would love to hear what these doctors have to say regarding the comparison between FUT and FUE.

 

Send me your real name and phone number and we'll do a three way call and record it. Are you in ?

 

Dr. Feller

[Sean]

Gas,

Would you be interested in doing a three way phone call with any or all of these doctors you have been quoting? Let's recording it and then post the recording right here on this forum for everyone to listen to. I would love to hear what these doctors have to say regarding the comparison between FUT and FUE.

 

Send me your real name and phone number and we'll do a three way call and record it. Are you in ?

 

Dr. Feller

 

Now this is an interesting conversation most folks would love to hear. It will be helpful to most prospective patients and those that had undergone procedures in the past.