Jump to content
Phil36fromaus

Dr Devroye 8 MONTH REVIEW (FUE 2583 Grafts)

Recommended Posts

Dear forum members,

I think that this discussion can be resumed in an evident miscommunication at the time of the preoperative consultation. The reason why we didn't implant any grafts in the very first hairline is included in the patient's first post and we did so following (what we thought to be) his wishes and expectations : "I basically tried to explaining how I liked the initial appearance and placement of my hairline area (created by my first HT doctor), and that I wanted to add density behind it." Now, this is exactly what has been done in this case : reinforcing the density of the thinning areas behind the hairline, with a major focus on the midscalp and vertex, the areas not grafted during the patient’s first surgery. Regarding the number of grafts harvested : I do not think that 2583 grafts can be considered a megasession – on the contrary, in this specific case, I find this number perfectly appropriate to achieve a homogeneous density on the thinning areas, which represented a quite important surface. Based on the pictures posted, I honestly don't see any issue related with donor overharvesting or visible FUE extraction signs. Someone can argue that the overall donor density has diminished, but this phenomenon is intrinsic to FUE. Also the FUT scar seems fairly covered by the grafts we implanted in it – not to be misunderstood with the indented nature that a number of FUT scars have. This cannot be corrected. It is important to underline that the donor area had been physically inspected and the areas of the scalp to be implanted were marked (these areas didn't include the hairline) prior to the procedure, as for every procedure in my clinic.   

I want also to point out that the patient has benefitted from a one-week follow-up at the clinic (unlike "standard" patients, who normally benefit from a post-operative check-up in the morning following their surgery, before their departure), since he didn't leave Belgium until the week after the procedure was performed. He came to the clinic several times and if in just one occasion he had told me directly and clearly that he was not happy about the procedure, there would have been absolutely no problem to perform a small touch-up in order to match his expectations. However, nothing was mentioned and the patient left Belgium apparently happy – until three weeks after the procedure, when he started to complain about his hairline –  all the rest came subsequently. On a side note, I want to clarify that I always stand by my patients and take their follow-up very seriously, in fact I send a post-operative email to all of them at certain times after their procedure to receive some news. In this patient's case, these emails were not sent since he contacted us on his own initiative just before the time due to send them.

I am truly regretful that the patient isn't satisfied about his outcome and the general proceedings of the surgery, even though I have the feeling that he is upset rather with himself for not having been able to clearly explain his goals and expectations at the due time. However, I invite the patient to contact my secretariat to fix a date for a free touch-up procedure, at his best convenience.

 

Jean Devroye

 

  • Like 1

Dr. Jean Devroye

HTS Clinic - Bruxelles

Email: info@drdevroye.com

Telephone: +32 2 880 70 60

Website: http://www.hair-transplant-surgery.com/en/home

Online consultation: https://www.hair-transplant-surgery.com/en/Online-consultation

Devroye Instruments: http://www.devroyeinstruments.com

Dr. Devroye is a member of the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration Physicians

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Dr. Jean Devroye said:

Dear forum members,

I think that this discussion can be resumed in an evident miscommunication at the time of the preoperative consultation. The reason why we didn't implant any grafts in the very first hairline is included in the patient's first post and we did so following (what we thought to be) his wishes and expectations : "I basically tried to explaining how I liked the initial appearance and placement of my hairline area (created by my first HT doctor), and that I wanted to add density behind it." Now, this is exactly what has been done in this case : reinforcing the density of the thinning areas behind the hairline, with a major focus on the midscalp and vertex, the areas not grafted during the patient’s first surgery. Regarding the number of grafts harvested : I do not think that 2583 grafts can be considered a megasession – on the contrary, in this specific case, I find this number perfectly appropriate to achieve a homogeneous density on the thinning areas, which represented a quite important surface. Based on the pictures posted, I honestly don't see any issue related with donor overharvesting or visible FUE extraction signs. Someone can argue that the overall donor density has diminished, but this phenomenon is intrinsic to FUE. Also the FUT scar seems fairly covered by the grafts we implanted in it – not to be misunderstood with the indented nature that a number of FUT scars have. This cannot be corrected. It is important to underline that the donor area had been physically inspected and the areas of the scalp to be implanted were marked (these areas didn't include the hairline) prior to the procedure, as for every procedure in my clinic.   

I want also to point out that the patient has benefitted from a one-week follow-up at the clinic (unlike "standard" patients, who normally benefit from a post-operative check-up in the morning following their surgery, before their departure), since he didn't leave Belgium until the week after the procedure was performed. He came to the clinic several times and if in just one occasion he had told me directly and clearly that he was not happy about the procedure, there would have been absolutely no problem to perform a small touch-up in order to match his expectations. However, nothing was mentioned and the patient left Belgium apparently happy – until three weeks after the procedure, when he started to complain about his hairline –  all the rest came subsequently. On a side note, I want to clarify that I always stand by my patients and take their follow-up very seriously, in fact I send a post-operative email to all of them at certain times after their procedure to receive some news. In this patient's case, these emails were not sent since he contacted us on his own initiative just before the time due to send them.

I am truly regretful that the patient isn't satisfied about his outcome and the general proceedings of the surgery, even though I have the feeling that he is upset rather with himself for not having been able to clearly explain his goals and expectations at the due time. However, I invite the patient to contact my secretariat to fix a date for a free touch-up procedure, at his best convenience.

 

Jean Devroye

 

Good response. I still find the approach strange that the thin area at the front of the hairline wasn't covered even if it wasn't expressly asked for, but the touch-up offer without a doubt shows the clinic work to keep their patients happy even in an inconvenient situation like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Dr. Jean Devroye said:

Dear forum members,

I think that this discussion can be resumed in an evident miscommunication at the time of the preoperative consultation. The reason why we didn't implant any grafts in the very first hairline is included in the patient's first post and we did so following (what we thought to be) his wishes and expectations : "I basically tried to explaining how I liked the initial appearance and placement of my hairline area (created by my first HT doctor), and that I wanted to add density behind it." Now, this is exactly what has been done in this case : reinforcing the density of the thinning areas behind the hairline, with a major focus on the midscalp and vertex, the areas not grafted during the patient’s first surgery. Regarding the number of grafts harvested : I do not think that 2583 grafts can be considered a megasession – on the contrary, in this specific case, I find this number perfectly appropriate to achieve a homogeneous density on the thinning areas, which represented a quite important surface. Based on the pictures posted, I honestly don't see any issue related with donor overharvesting or visible FUE extraction signs. Someone can argue that the overall donor density has diminished, but this phenomenon is intrinsic to FUE. Also the FUT scar seems fairly covered by the grafts we implanted in it – not to be misunderstood with the indented nature that a number of FUT scars have. This cannot be corrected. It is important to underline that the donor area had been physically inspected and the areas of the scalp to be implanted were marked (these areas didn't include the hairline) prior to the procedure, as for every procedure in my clinic.   

I want also to point out that the patient has benefitted from a one-week follow-up at the clinic (unlike "standard" patients, who normally benefit from a post-operative check-up in the morning following their surgery, before their departure), since he didn't leave Belgium until the week after the procedure was performed. He came to the clinic several times and if in just one occasion he had told me directly and clearly that he was not happy about the procedure, there would have been absolutely no problem to perform a small touch-up in order to match his expectations. However, nothing was mentioned and the patient left Belgium apparently happy – until three weeks after the procedure, when he started to complain about his hairline –  all the rest came subsequently. On a side note, I want to clarify that I always stand by my patients and take their follow-up very seriously, in fact I send a post-operative email to all of them at certain times after their procedure to receive some news. In this patient's case, these emails were not sent since he contacted us on his own initiative just before the time due to send them.

I am truly regretful that the patient isn't satisfied about his outcome and the general proceedings of the surgery, even though I have the feeling that he is upset rather with himself for not having been able to clearly explain his goals and expectations at the due time. However, I invite the patient to contact my secretariat to fix a date for a free touch-up procedure, at his best convenience.

 

Jean Devroye

 

great response

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×