Why NOT to get an FUE- Interview with Dr. Willaim Reed- by Dr. Feller and Bloxham

[Arminius]

lol. That's practically finger length. You could hide a small rodent in hair that long.

 

Guys with FUE are posting pictures with #1 or #0.5 in which the hair is so short you can see their scalp.

 

Just to clarify my opinion on the FUE vs. FUT thing - I do think that FUT is a good option for some people. Particularly those who have no interest in ever having very short hair. For the rest of us, the scar is a deal breaker.

 

"For the rest of us, the scar is a deal breaker." Boom. Nothing more needs to be said. A strip scar is unsightly if you want to have your hair shorter than 4 millimetres.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I can understand that for some people "the scar is a deal breaker".

 

What I can't understand is how the poorer growth guaranteed with the FUE procedure is NOT a deal breaker.

[Arminius]

I can understand that for some people "the scar is a deal breaker".

 

What I can't understand is how the poorer growth guaranteed with the FUE procedure is NOT a deal breaker.

 

Unsightly scar running across the entire back of your head versus marginally less growth? I tend to believe that the latter is the far better option.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

That's the problem.

 

Patients such as yourself believe and want to believe that FUE procedures only result in MARGINALLY less growth. What a nonspecific and nice sounding word. The problem is, it's not true.

 

Growth rates from FUE usually start at 75% that of FUT and go well down from there. That hardly counts as "marginal".

 

Also, the amount of extra donor area damage and reduction in the number of grafts for future procedures due to that unnecessary donor damage is undeniable.

 

I know you claim that you do not what a linear scar on the back of your head, but that's usually just a cover. Most people who don't want strip are simply afraid of the surgical strip harvest but don't want to admit it. So they claim that they hate the scar. It's nonesense.

 

After all, the FUT scar is hidden under the hair and if done right can allow a person to fade cut their hair as many of my patients do.

 

If a megasesssion FUE is performed you can't shave your hair down anymore than an FUT patient would, so what's the point ? One way or another it's going to look like something happened in the donor area, but the FUT patient has a greater chance of being able to cover it completely than the FUE patient because there is no significant donor thinning.

[Arminius]

That's the problem.

 

Patients such as yourself believe and want to believe that FUE procedures only result in MARGINALLY less growth. What a nonspecific and nice sounding word. The problem is, it's not true.

 

Growth rates from FUE usually start at 75% that of FUT and go well down from there. That hardly counts as "marginal".

 

Also, the amount of extra donor area damage and reduction in the number of grafts for future procedures due to that unnecessary donor damage is undeniable.

 

I know you claim that you do not what a linear scar on the back of your head, but that's usually just a cover. Most people who don't want strip are simply afraid of the surgical strip harvest but don't want to admit it. So they claim that they hate the scar. It's nonesense.

 

After all, the FUT scar is hidden under the hair and if done right can allow a person to fade cut their hair as many of my patients do.

 

If a megasesssion FUE is performed you can't shave your hair down anymore than an FUT patient would, so what's the point ? One way or another it's going to look like something happened in the donor area, but the FUT patient has a greater chance of being able to cover it completely than the FUE patient because there is no significant donor thinning.

 

With respect, I find the vast majority of your arguments extremely tangential and facile. They simply do not hold water, Dr. Feller.

 

For example, you make a categorical statement that "most people who don't want strip are simply afraid of surgical harvest but don't want to admit it." First, this is unquestionable nonsense. Whether one is afraid of being punctured 2500 times by a surgical tool versus having a strip of flesh removed seems to be substantively very similar. Second, you state that "f a megasession FUE is performed you can't shave your hair down anymore than an FUT patient would." I am very surprised you promulgate such an obscure statement on an open forum. This is complete nonsense, and I believe that you know this.

 

You cannot counter the following point, no matter how hard you try. Many patients do not want to have a large, unsightly, multi-inch scar, prone to stretching, run across the back of their heads. No matter what you say, nor how often you attempt your arguments on these forums, you cannot seem to accept that a scar is just that. It is unsightly and prevents a future patient from shaving down or even having a short buzz-cut.

 

In closing, both FUE and FUT have positive and negative associated elements. I do not argue that an FUE patient may have as many future follicular units compared with an FUT patient. This statement, however, fails to account for people who may only need a maximum of 3500 total lifetime grafts. Of course an individual who needs 6000 follicular units is a likely better FUT candidate. I think every forum poster concedes that particular point.

 

I do not wish to come off strident, but it seems unfair that you do not concede the issues surrounding unsightly strip scars. Once you admit that, and I believe that you will do so eventually if I continue to pester you about the topic, we can say our goodbyes and wish each other well. It's a beautiful day here in Vancouver. I am heading outside with my lovely girlfriend and my 1 millimetre haircut. No hat to hide that giant strip scar, Dr. Feller! ;-)

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Arminius,

 

The difference in our views is that you only have your own singular HT experience to draw from and then write as if you can speak for the multitudes. This confuses patients and is no doubt part of the basis of the hype underlying FUE today.

 

I personally have no doubt you are sincere, so please don't get me wrong. But you honestly and respectfully do not know what you are talking about because your access to actual hair transplant patients and surgery is severely limited.

 

I literally have thousands of patient experiences and surgical experiences to draw from, and even more if you include patients who contact me online telling me about their very poor FUE results and asking if I can help them..

 

When I write what I do about FUE it's not to win points. It's to inform potential patients that FUE is simply not what it is claimed to be on the internet. Even you said that the yields are MARGINALLY lower than FUT. Yet I claim that you speak out of turn because, in truth, you have nothing to base that statement on.

 

Have you ever seen an FUE result in the flesh ? And if you did, how many ? One. Two. Maybe three? Or is all your knowledge from internet forums and doctor websites ? Because both can be, and often are, misleading. Demonstrably so. And shame on my colleagues for that.

 

Ask yourself this: if FUE results are only "marginally" less than that of FUT, then why does strip surgery still exist as the mainstream of hair transplant surgery ? If the difference were only marginal, every clinic would reject FUT for FUE. But haven't you noticed that absolutely no notable clinic who claims to do BOTH has rejected FUT ?

 

Only about 15% of FUE patients will achieve growth results comparable to FUT. And that is at a price much higher than FUT surgery-and I don't necessarily just mean money. The damage to the donor area and the number of grafts destroyed during an FUE megasession is inexcusable and indefensible.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

There is more FUT in North America than there is in Europe but there is more FUE in Europe than there is in North America. Most clinics in North America that have taken on FUE are charging a premium for their FUE compared to their strip, you included. In Europe, strip clinics that do FUE are doing more FUE than strip because their FUE pricing is much lower and it is what people want. I believe this is why FUT is still done more in North America than FUE. Dr. Lupanzula is only €4.5 per graft. That's 5 bucks US per graft. I can go to Brussels and enjoy a week in Europe, have a world class doctor remove every graft with a manual punch, get a great hairline and no strip scar and still have change left over compared to what I'd pay in North America.

 

 

 

Where did you come up with this number?

 

"In Europe, strip clinics that do FUE are doing more FUE than strip because their FUE pricing is much lower and it is what people want. "

 

I have no doubt this statement is dead on accurate. But it is also very revealing:

 

1. European clinics are doing more FUE not because it is better, but because European patients can't afford top of the line FUT surgery so they have to settle for FUE surgery- a much more unpredictable and unsuccessful procedure that can be done on the cheap.

 

2. The implication is that FUE is less expensive, but a better procedure. This is simply untrue on so many levels. It doesn't even make common sense.The only true part of this statement is that it requires far less of the clinic in terms of staffing, training, and physical plant.

 

3. Yet another more ominous implication is that technicians and other unlicensed/ untrained staff are performing surgery. A practice that is illegal in the US for a reason. I could tell you true to life horror stories about the way untrained low paid staff endanger patients.

 

4. The justification for offering and performing FUE surgery which flies in the face of over 20 years of hair transplant and general surgery dogma concerning graft/tissue handling is because "that's what people want". This is not an ethical nor acceptable reason to offer this adjunct procedure instead of the mainstream procedure. Hair Transplantation is surgery first, a business second.

 

Most FUE patients in Europe, as in America, are people who would never have had a proper FUT procedure because they were afraid of the strip harvest; however, exclusive to Europe is the fact that FUE is actually cheaper than FUT and therefore people who could never afford a hair transplant now can. I would have no problem with this IF FUE were as good and reliable as FUT, but it isn't, and doctors are failing to inform patients of this. In Europe, this omission may be a matter of financial survival. In America it is grounds for revocation of medical licensure. And it should be.

 

For a patient to go for FUE over FUT is to ignore logic and reality. It is an emotional choice that excludes reason. It's always the same false appeal " I don't want a linear scar". This is an absurd reason because it ignores the most important point of the surgery: that the hair should grow as thick as possible. If a person seriously wants to shave their head, then why get a hair transplant in the first place ?

 

I have been performing hair transplantation for 24 years and patients seeking hair transplant surgery are not looking to shave their heads. That is a canard made up by uninformed patients and internet hype to mislead prospective patients into believing that FUE leaves them a "way out" if things don't go well. Take a look at the shaved head of a patient who had 3,000 FUE grafts taken then get back to me.

Edited May 27, 2017 by Dr. Alan Feller

[hairlosscpa]

I had a strip from a coalition doctor. Pretty thin scar and only 1700 grafts extracted when the goal was 2000 [another con there about strip]. If I got a 4 guard or less, the scar was extremely visible. I would see the disappointed look on my barbers face. A linear pattern is going to be more noticeable. It wasn't until I got a FUE procedure, 2500 grafts, by a recommended surgeon, both to my hairline and strip scar where I could finally get a 3 guard without visible scarring. I'm at peace now hah.

Edited May 27, 2017 by hairlosscpa
Spelling

[Dr. Alan Feller]

I had a strip from a coalition doctor. Pretty thin scar and only 1700 grafts extracted when the goal was 2000 [another con there about strip]. If I got a 4 guard or les, the scar was extremely visible. I would see the disappointed look on my barbers face. A linear pattern is going to be more noticeable. It wasn't until I got a FUE procedure, 2500 grafts, by a recommended surgeon, both to my hairline and strip scar where I could finallyy get a 3 guard without visible scarring. I'm at peace now hah.

 

And yet the only post operative donor photos I see in your links are with your hair long. Which begs the question: why bother with FUE ?

 

I saw your linear scar and it looked good to me. You could have had your first scar removed in a second strip procedure and easily have had the option of a tight military fade buzz cut- and nobody would have been any the wiser.

[hairlosscpa]

And yet the only post operative donor photos I see in your links are with your hair long. Which begs the question: why bother with FUE ?

 

I saw your linear scar and it looked good to me. You could have had your first scar removed in a second strip procedure and easily have had the option of a tight military fade buzz cut- and nobody would have been any the wiser.

 

Dr Feller - So you are saying the better move would be to remove the first already thin scar via FUSS with the goal to make it thinner, which isn't even certain based on a multitude of variables? I have attached 4 pics, first two 1 year after my FUT procedure and second two from today (1.5 years after FUE). I know the latter is slightly longer, but even at shorter lengths, it looks much better than the former.

 

Please let me know which one you would prefer. Thanks.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Dr Feller - So you are saying the better move would be to remove the first already thin scar via FUSS with the goal to make it thinner, which isn't even certain based on a multitude of variables? I have attached 4 pics, first two 1 year after my FUT procedure and second two from today (1.5 years after FUE). I know the latter is slightly longer, but even at shorter lengths, it looks much better than the former.

 

Please let me know which one you would prefer. Thanks.

 

I don't like to comment on specific cases because it could hurt that persons feelings, but since you are the one posting the photos and asking me specifically to comment then I will:

 

First, it is disingenuous to use photos where the hair has been cut to different lengths. Obviously the reason you left the hair longer in todays photo was to cover the scars left by your old linear scar AND the FUE scars.

 

Also

 

 

Your donor hair is obviously thinner in todays pictures due to the classic damage and thinning large FUE cases typically cause. You have large patchy areas that are visible, particularly on your right side, despite the fact that you admittedly left the hair longer AND are on Propecia.

 

So to answer your question I would prefer the FUT because:

1. I know the hair would grow better in the recipient site.

2. All of my hair would be from the safe zone.

3. I would have more hair in the donor area because less would have been injured or killed.

4. I would not have patchy thin areas in the donor.

5. I would be able to completely cover my donor scar

 

If you had a proper FUT procedure for your second surgery you donor area would be thicker, you'd have more donor graft available for future use, and your scar would be just as invisible at the length you yourself prefer to cut your hair at.

 

Please see the conversation I and Dr. Bloxham recently had with another FUE patient like yourself named Yaz. He made the same argument you are trying to make. He claimed there was no way an FUT surgery could have allowed him to enjoy his current hairstyle. Then we showed him not only was that not true, but the FUT would have allowed him to enjoy an even more revealing hairstyle, with less injury to the skin, less scarring, a greater chance for growth in the recipient area, and more grafts available in the future.

 

 

The Yaz conversation starts at post number 18 in the following link. He too wasted his time on FUE when he could have gotten a better more reliable result with FUT AND had less donor scarring and more grafts available for the future. When he realized this he disappeared from the thread:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/186983-why-not-get-fue-interview-dr-willaim-reed-dr-feller-bloxham-2.html

Edited May 27, 2017 by Dr. Alan Feller

[Dr. Alan Feller]

To those who have read the exchange between me and Yaz and me and Hairlosscpa I would like to share my deep felt belief based on 24 years experience and thousands upon thousands of consultations with patients.

 

When you have done something every business day for that long you begin to get a feel for people and the real reasons why they do what they do.

 

I believe both these patients chose FUE not because they couldn't accept the thought of a concealed linear scar under the hair within the donor area after the surgery, but because they couldn't tolerate the thought of the actual surgical procedure where a strip of scalp is removed from the donor area. They were afraid of it. Simple as that.

 

I don't mean this pejoratively, it just is what it is. I know some patients cannot overcome irrational fears of surgery. And while I personally believe this is a valid reason to choose an inferior surgery like FUE in the case of elective surgery, it is misleading to claim the choice was made for something as mundane and concealable as the production of a linear scar. All the more irrational when you understand that large FUE surgeries cause far more donor damage and scarring that prevent FUE patients from shaving their heads as claimed falsely by nearly every proponent of FUE.

 

In both these cases: Yaz and Hairlosscpa claimed they wanted FUE so they could shave their hair. But neither of them does. Yet, irrationally, they BOTH state they CAN shave their head, but show photos with hair grown out in the donor area that would easily conceal FUT scars. Even bad ones.

 

So this begs the question: why did these two patients opt for FUE ? The answer is simple and rather common for FUE recipients: they cannot bring themselves to have a proper FUT procedure performed out of fear of the actual surgery involved with strip. This is a VALID reason and nothing to be ashamed of. But when patients like these try to disparage FUT and trump it's so-called shortcomings as the reason I have to call them out.

 

Both these patients could style their hair exactly as they do in their own recent photos, and even more revealing, had they received FUT surgery instead of FUE surgery.

[Yaz89]

 

Please see the conversation I and Dr. Bloxham recently had with another FUE patient like yourself named Yaz. He made the same argument you are trying to make. He claimed there was no way an FUT surgery could have allowed him to enjoy his current hairstyle. Then we showed him not only was that not true, but the FUT would have allowed him to enjoy an even more revealing hairstyle, with less injury to the skin, less scarring, a greater chance for growth in the recipient area, and more grafts available in the future.

 

 

The Yaz conversation starts at post number 18 in the following link. He too wasted his time on FUE when he could have gotten a better more reliable result with FUT AND had less donor scarring and more grafts available for the future. When he realized this he disappeared from the thread:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/186983-why-not-get-fue-interview-dr-willaim-reed-dr-feller-bloxham-2.html[/size][/color]

 

You and Dr Bloxham showed nothing. Dr Bloxham showed pics of FUT scars at grade 3's. I cut my donor at grade 0.

 

I would have got better growth with FUT! Yeah right. I was an total eight ball. My FUE surgeries were successful. Anybody who reads my threads knows this.

 

Disappeared? Naaa, enjoying my life thanks to Koray Erdogan!

Edited May 28, 2017 by Yaz89

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Bullshit. You and your bumchum Bloxham showed nothing. Bloxham showed pics of FUT scars at grade 3's. I cut my donor at grade 0.

 

I would have got better growth with FUT! Yeah right. I was an total eight ball. My FUE surgeries were successful. Anybody who reads my threads knows this.

 

Disappeared? Naaa, enjoying my life thanks to Koray Erdogan!

 

Yaz-

 

When someone has to descend to personal attacks and foul language you have lost the argument.

 

Your potty mouth has been reported.

Edited May 27, 2017 by Dr. Alan Feller

[Yaz89]

Yaz-

 

When someone has to descend to personal attacks and foul language you have lost the argument.

 

Your potty mouth has been reported.

 

Yes Dr Feller. Next time do not mention me in proxy statements. And twist my words and posts for the benefit for Feller And Bloxham

Edited May 28, 2017 by Yaz89

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Yes Darth Feller. Next time do not mention me in proxy statements. And twist my words and posts for the benefit for Feller And Bloxham

 

Yaz,

 

Your story is a classic FUE cautionary tale.

 

If you didn't want your story and your photos to be discussed then you should not have injected them into this topic.

 

This is why I don't like to comment on specific cases. Feelings always get hurt and that's not at all what i'm after.

Edited May 27, 2017 by Dr. Alan Feller

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Yaz,

 

I'm actually away for the weekend, but I found your comments so inappropriate and false that I felt compelled to respond.

 

First, I have always been civil and respectful to you, so there is no reason to name call. Especially in the manner that you did. Very disappointing.

 

Second, you are not being honest about our exchange. You stated that you could shave your head to a zero with no scarring visible to an "untrained" eye, despite the fact that the images you showed had a long fade cut. I stated that you can easily do this style with an FUT and stated that one should not expect to shave that low with an FUE. You asked for evidence.

 

I pulled several random examples of the exact fade and explained that there is zero scarring under an FUT scar, so you can shave as low as you want; I then showed your own picture of your donor at a zero after only one of your FUE procedures to demonstrate that there was a significant amount of visible scarring.

 

You then stated that I was showing "bad pictures" of your donor and claimed the fade examples weren't accurate and attempted the classic debate retreat.

 

Again, very disappointed you resorted to this. If you can't debate the facts, just don't debate. But don't resort to this type of behavior. There is no place for it.

[Yaz89]

Dr Feller, shave off your donor and lets compare my fue scars with your fut scars.

Edited May 28, 2017 by Yaz89

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Yaz,

When you stop acting like a child I will address you again.

 

911

It seems there is a battle for the survival of HT clinics in Europe. I imagine this is due to the cheap FUE being offered by nearby third world countries. So, in the words of Dr. Bloxham, there is a race to the bottom in Europe.

 

I have a question, if the price for FUT in Europe has dropped so low, I wonder how many trained staff each clinic is now employing to properly perform FUT compared to 2010 ? I'll bet fewer.

 

In fact, the Ishrs just sent out a questionaire to over 1,000 physician members and I suggested that very question be included. Should be interesting.

[Sean]

Dr Feller,

 

Do you have any pics of results of mFUE and the donor extraction sites? How is the yield so far with that technique? I don't know what to think of ishrs at the time being as some members seem to do things detrimental to patient safety and they are still members of such list it seems.

 

Dr Bloxham or Dr Feller, do you have any technique that can remove cobblestoning or ridging?

 

I think main problem with FUE is robots, techs, nurses, extracting. Or some using harsh high speed motorized tools. Or Suction based tools. Not many commit to true manual punch and that us sad. Manual may reduce the negative impacts quite a bit it seems.

 

I just wish there is something or someone can do to help some repair folks move forward.

 

Dr Feller and Dr Bloxham, youve been making some good points and worth noting. Id love to see more repair work by your office. Thanks.

[hairlosscpa]

 

I don't like to comment on specific cases because it could hurt that persons feelings, but since you are the one posting the photos and asking me specifically to comment then I will:

 

First, it is disingenuous to use photos where the hair has been cut to different lengths. Obviously the reason you left the hair longer in todays photo was to cover the scars left by your old linear scar AND the FUE scars.

 

Also

 

 

Your donor hair is obviously thinner in todays pictures due to the classic damage and thinning large FUE cases typically cause. You have large patchy areas that are visible, particularly on your right side, despite the fact that you admittedly left the hair longer AND are on Propecia.

 

So to answer your question I would prefer the FUT because:

1. I know the hair would grow better in the recipient site.

2. All of my hair would be from the safe zone.

3. I would have more hair in the donor area because less would have been injured or killed.

4. I would not have patchy thin areas in the donor.

5. I would be able to completely cover my donor scar

 

If you had a proper FUT procedure for your second surgery you donor area would be thicker, you'd have more donor graft available for future use, and your scar would be just as invisible at the length you yourself prefer to cut your hair at.

 

Please see the conversation I and Dr. Bloxham recently had with another FUE patient like yourself named Yaz. He made the same argument you are trying to make. He claimed there was no way an FUT surgery could have allowed him to enjoy his current hairstyle. Then we showed him not only was that not true, but the FUT would have allowed him to enjoy an even more revealing hairstyle, with less injury to the skin, less scarring, a greater chance for growth in the recipient area, and more grafts available in the future.

 

 

The Yaz conversation starts at post number 18 in the following link. He too wasted his time on FUE when he could have gotten a better more reliable result with FUT AND had less donor scarring and more grafts available for the future. When he realized this he disappeared from the thread:

 

http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/186983-why-not-get-fue-interview-dr-willaim-reed-dr-feller-bloxham-2.html

 

Dr. Feller,

 

Thanks for your input. No feelings hurt. I'll address your comments below:

 

1. I failed to mention the pics from today were after a shower, damp hair, under bright lighting. To the untrained eye I have received no abnormal look and my new barber does not have a clue. In fact, when I told him, he was so surprised I had anything done. Very different experience from post-FUT. The second two pics are from today (1.5 years post-FUE) with my hair dry.

 

2. I have not noticed any FUE scarring. Yes, I admit my donor area looks slightly less dense, but that's to me only and to a doctor with 20+ years of HT experience. My hair is longer not to cover scarring, but because my current FUE hairline allows me to slick my hair back and I prefer my sides to be longer to compliment the hairline. I leave it longer by choice.

3. I had FUT from a well respected coalition doctor. What is your definition of a "proper FUT"? You even said in your other post that: "I saw your linear scar and it looked good to me."

4. It is unfair to mislead the public saying, "they BOTH state they CAN shave their head". Please let me know where I stated this.

 

5. It's unfair to mislead the public saying, "they cannot bring themselves to have a proper FUT procedure performed out of fear of the actual surgery involved with strip." If you read my FUE experience linked in my signature, I state that I thought FUE was more painful than FUT. I would gladly do another FUT if it wasn't for the linear scar.

 

Looking forward to your response.

[wazaam]

Dr Feller & Blake is it possible to get some clarity

Quote:

2014,

 

Dr Feller actually does quite a bit of FUE. Generally around 2 cases a week. He's also been doing it for 14 years. He's also invented FUE devices, new techniques, etc

Dr Feller or Blake can you address these questions.

 

1. Is it possible for you or Dr Feller to provide some FUE results? Is Dr Feller still performing 2 cases per week?

 

I still have a hard time find many results (on any forums) based on my extended research. Also if you could include some larger cases that would be even better (2500-5000) graft FUE results from Dr. Feller. Just one larger case would be great to FINALLY view.

 

 

2. Dr Feller can you comment on how many FUE cases have you personally performed? Based Blake's information provided from 2014 and given holidays sick days etc. you would be performing 75-90 FUE cases per year? Is that figure accurate?

 

3. MFUE is there any results or updates that you could please post. Extraction sites etc..

 

Thanks,

 

 

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Dr. Feller,

 

Before we continue I'd like to say thank you for your time in this.

 

 

 

The price of FUT in Europe has dropped so low compared to what or where? It seems to be only slightly less than what NA doctors are charging for strip so I don't see how this relates to your point about the number of techs in these clinics. In the grand scheme of things it is essentially the same.

 

Will you please answer the question I asked you in an earlier post?

 

 

 

How did you come to this conclusion?

 

I came to this number two ways:

The first is clinical experience. I have seen hundreds of FUE patients in person and only about 15% demonstrated results that were comparable to FUT for the number of grafts they reported they received.

 

The second is from Rassman and Bernstein's paper on FOX testing. A study that has conveniently been forgotten by FUE adherents.

 

In the study only 26% of patients produced grafts that APPEARED to be as intact as FUT grafts (53 out of 200 patients). The other 74% produced grafts with varying levels of visible damage and difficulty in removal. Obviously damaged grafts will not likely grow as well as FUT grafts which are all undamaged- which means, by comparison, only 26% of FUE patients can have an expectation of growth on par with FUT.

 

So now we are at 26%. So how did I get down to 15% ?

The Fox test study only evaluated for VISIBLE injury. It did not test for graft viability. Since the publication of that paper it has become clear that even perfect LOOKING FUE grafts may not grow well or not at all. If you factor in a growth rate of about 60%, a number I base on clinical observation and my own surgical observation of hundreds of FUE patients, for healthy appearing FUE grafts just after extraction you get about 15-19% .

[Dr. Alan Feller]

Dr Feller & Blake is it possible to get some clarity

Quote:

2014,

 

Dr Feller actually does quite a bit of FUE. Generally around 2 cases a week. He's also been doing it for 14 years. He's also invented FUE devices, new techniques, etc

Dr Feller or Blake can you address these questions.

 

1. Is it possible for you or Dr Feller to provide some FUE results? Is Dr Feller still performing 2 cases per week?

 

I still have a hard time find many results (on any forums) based on my extended research. Also if you could include some larger cases that would be even better (2500-5000) graft FUE results from Dr. Feller. Just one larger case would be great to FINALLY view.

 

 

2. Dr Feller can you comment on how many FUE cases have you personally performed? Based Blake's information provided from 2014 and given holidays sick days etc. you would be performing 75-90 FUE cases per year? Is that figure accurate?

 

3. MFUE is there any results or updates that you could please post. Extraction sites etc..

 

Thanks,

 

 

 

The FUE cases I perform are smaller cases of a few hundred maximum for fill ins, repairs, and for patients who otherwise could not have FUT surgery. I posted many of them including video years ago but they get little notice because they are such small cases. Most of my FUE cases now are to remove parts of old plugs or minigrafts, usually on the hairline or in front of where the hairline ought to be, in preparation for a large FUT procedure.

 

 

I have performed about 600 FUE cases but Dr. Bloxham insists I have done more. He may be right as I haven't kept a running score. If you include the use of FUE to remove old grafts and whittle down plugs on the hairline then you can put my number of FUE cases into the thousands. By the way, it is much more difficult to remove follicles from an implanted plug or minigraft so when doctors contact me on how to start learning FUE I tell them to offer this service for free (as I did). Patients love it and it builds great manual skill and confidence. I did hundreds of these for free in 2002 and 2003 before ever charging for an FUE session and use it regularly when performing FUT to "clean up" old misplaced plugs and minigrafts.

 

Our mFUE procedure has been evolving over the past three years and we have seen enough results to settle on a final protocol that we are writing up now. Interestingly, Dr. Paul Rose of Florida just published an article that arrives at the same conclusion we did about donor area usage independent of us and from a completely different point of view. It was so exciting to read how his paper supported our findings that I called him and he was just as excited that our independent findings matched his. It's a bit much to get into the details now but we will make a video with Dr. Rose that details what we found and why. The bottom line is that FUE is too injurious to the donor area and an alternative like mFUE may well be the solution to the problem.

[Dr. Alan Feller]

 

My hair is longer not to cover scarring, but because my current FUE hairline allows me to slick my hair back and I prefer my sides to be longer to compliment the hairline. I leave it longer by choice..

 

That's my point. You leave your donor area longer BY CHOICE for styling reasons. That length easily conceals an FUT scar, so there is no point in having FUE performed. And no matter how well you believe your FUE grafts grew, FUT grafts would have grown better with less sacrifice to your donor area.

 

Talk about being able to comb transplanted hair backward look at this result from a recent patient who visited for follow up. The entire frontal third of his scalp was bald and in just ONE proper FUT procedure he can comb it backward as far as he wants. We included wet and dry hair results video.

 

Edited May 28, 2017 by Dr. Alan Feller