2663 - FUE - Dr Lupanzula - May 14th 2019

[ahmeda87]

1 hour ago, Scott Medikemos said:

Thanks for the update Ahmeda87.
There is a significant aesthetic improvement since your last post and this will continue to improve over the coming months with your full result coming in at 12-15 months.
I'm sure you are really pleased so far and I look forward to seeing your updates over the coming months.

Scott
Patient Liaison Manager
MEDIKEMOS Clinic

To learn more about our clinic, Dr. Lupanzula's work and our results, you could visit the following website:
Our English language website:
https://medikemosclinic.com/en/

We are the only clinic in Belgium recommended by The Hair Transplant Mentor™
https://www.hairtransplantmentor.com/belgium-hair-transplant/

View the best hair transplant results videos on Youtube!
https://www.youtube.com/user/MHairTransplantat
• Mobile:+ 447855544669
• Medikemos Hair Transplantation
263 Av. Brugmann, 1180 Bruxelles Belgique
 

Really happy so far but worried about density as someone said on another form I need another HT...... 

[Shmiggy]

6 hours ago, ahmeda87 said:

 

Thanks, I guess Density is my only worry now. I did a total for 4 PRP sessions every 4 weeks as thats all I needed. To be honest, I am not sure if PRP worked. 

I did 3 PRP sessions myself over the summer. Didn’t notice a difference.

[Melvin- Admin]

9 hours ago, ahmeda87 said:

Really happy so far but worried about density as someone said on another form I need another HT...... 

At 5.5 months everyone wants more density, it’s really just the beginning.

[ahmeda87]

1 hour ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

At 5.5 months everyone wants more density, it’s really just the beginning.

thanks mate, feel more comfortable. When do people normally notice density increase?

[ahmeda87]

On 11/6/2019 at 7:46 PM, Shmiggy said:

I did 3 PRP sessions myself over the summer. Didn’t notice a difference.

Ye I guess PRP is a waste from my personal opinion haha

[ahmeda87]

at what point do people stop wearing fibres ? I know its a broad question. 

[InterventionalPDoc]

You need to grow the transplanted hair out in the front and keep it tight on the sides. Your hairstyle should compliment your transplant, use layering effect to your advantage. This is my 2 cents as you move forward, and you won't need hair fibers anymore. 

Also parting hair will show skin unless transplant was high density with lots of grafts packed in - which most people don't have the donor to support. 

Good luck 

Edited November 16, 2019 by InterventionalPDoc

[ahmeda87]

On 11/16/2019 at 3:14 PM, InterventionalPDoc said:

You need to grow the transplanted hair out in the front and keep it tight on the sides. Your hairstyle should compliment your transplant, use layering effect to your advantage. This is my 2 cents as you move forward, and you won't need hair fibers anymore. 

Also parting hair will show skin unless transplant was high density with lots of grafts packed in - which most people don't have the donor to support. 

Good luck 

 

Thanks for that. The hair parting is not my hair style, I just did it for a demonstration to compare with the before. I am now growing out the front and keep the sides shaved. Fingers crossed the 7 month mark photos will be much improved

[teeplant]

I think the result is promising so far and you can already see a big cosmetic change from pre-op. Although it's lacking in density, it is looking uniform. It's still early days and the side parting obviously doesn't help. 

[Melvin- Admin]

On 11/11/2019 at 2:36 PM, ahmeda87 said:

at what point do people stop wearing fibres ? I know its a broad question. 

I know for me, the answer is never. The truth is my hair will never look as good without fibers. With fibers my hair looks like I have incredible density, and hair transplants alone will never bring me that level of density- this is reality.

[Shmiggy]

18 minutes ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

I know for me, the answer is never. The truth is my hair will never look as good without fibers. With fibers my hair looks like I have incredible density, and hair transplants alone will never bring me that level of density- this is reality.

You have any pics without the fibers in?

[Melvin- Admin]

Just now, Shmiggy said:

You have any pics without the fibers in?

I don't have any fibers on any of my update pictures on either of my threads. I also have a video on YouTube, where I show you how to swim with hair loss concealer. I show my bare crown at 0:40

 

[Shmiggy]

You’re crown isn’t that bad. I’d be fine with that level of coverage. So you have no fibers on at all when you show your crown in the swimming video? Hair looks on point.

[Melvin- Admin]

1 minute ago, Shmiggy said:

You’re crown isn’t that bad. I’d be fine with that level of coverage. So you have no fibers on at all when you show your crown in the swimming video? Hair looks on point.

Yea, I have no fibers on, it's not bad when my hair is dry and combed to cover the crown, but it's definitely no comparison to when I use hair fibers or dermmatch. 

[Shmiggy]

1 hour ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

Yea, I have no fibers on, it's not bad when my hair is dry and combed to cover the crown, but it's definitely no comparison to when I use hair fibers or dermmatch. 

Well either way I’m jelly. You got your money’s worth to this point. Is that 2 surgeries or 3?

[ahmeda87]

10 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

I don't have any fibers on any of my update pictures on either of my threads. I also have a video on YouTube, where I show you how to swim with hair loss concealer. I show my bare crown at 0:40

 

Damn your results are insane! I saw your other video with your hair wet and without hair fibres! so Jealous! 

[ahmeda87]

16 hours ago, teeplant said:

I think the result is promising so far and you can already see a big cosmetic change from pre-op. Although it's lacking in density, it is looking uniform. It's still early days and the side parting obviously doesn't help. 

 

haha! as mentioned the parting is only for demonstration purposes. Not trying to be Peter Andre hahaha I normally have my hair shaved back and sides, short on the top and just combed forward. 

My only concern is density as I just passed 6.5 months and still wear a tiny bit of fibres but I cannot stick my hair put at the front yet as it looks abit spare. 

[teeplant]

4 hours ago, ahmeda87 said:

 

haha! as mentioned the parting is only for demonstration purposes. Not trying to be Peter Andre hahaha I normally have my hair shaved back and sides, short on the top and just combed forward. 

My only concern is density as I just passed 6.5 months and still wear a tiny bit of fibres but I cannot stick my hair put at the front yet as it looks abit spare. 

I've read that Dr Lupanzula has switched from manual FUE punch to motorized FUE? Has there been recent advancement in motorized FUE as I believe the doctor always maintained that manual FUE reduces trauma and lowers potential damage to the surrounding follicles. Maybe that's something the clinic can elaborate on? @Scott Medikemos

[Melvin- Admin]

On 11/28/2019 at 2:51 AM, ahmeda87 said:

Damn your results are insane! I saw your other video with your hair wet and without hair fibres! so Jealous! 

I had dermmatch on in the video, I showed myself putting it on. I don't want to give you guys unrealistic expectations. There is no way my hair would like that without hair loss concealers while wet.

[Melvin- Admin]

On 11/27/2019 at 6:15 PM, Shmiggy said:

Well either way I’m jelly. You got your money’s worth to this point. Is that 2 surgeries or 3?

3 surgeries. I will show you guys my crown, I'm very self-conscious about it, but I feel it is my duty to give you guys the straight-up truth. I'm happy, but I would be lying if I said I don't want more hair. At the moment, I do pretty good with concealers so i've held off.

[Szotz_257]

On 11/28/2019 at 4:32 PM, teeplant said:

I've read that Dr Lupanzula has switched from manual FUE punch to motorized FUE? Has there been recent advancement in motorized FUE as I believe the doctor always maintained that manual FUE reduces trauma and lowers potential damage to the surrounding follicles. Maybe that's something the clinic can elaborate on? @Scott Medikemos

I would like to know this as well. Low graft survival, poor growth and hair falling out later all seem to be persistent problems with users of motorized punch. In my opinion, this (the use of motorized extraction tools) is one of the first things a patient should ask about when consulting, and it should immediately rule a clinic out if they use it.

[Melvin- Admin]

On 11/29/2019 at 11:24 AM, Szotz_257 said:

I would like to know this as well. Low graft survival, poor growth and hair falling out later all seem to be persistent problems with users of motorized punch. In my opinion, this (the use of motorized extraction tools) is one of the first things a patient should ask about when consulting, and it should immediately rule a clinic out if they use it.

This is misinformation which is factually incorrect. Here’s a quote from highly-esteemed Dr. Konior

The mostly useless topic of manual versus motorized should be relegated to the trash heap.  It may have held relevance at some point in time, but it means little today.  Patients should also be leery of dogmatic statements made about how an individual conducts his or her practice as the only person who can provide definitive detail as to what is done and how it’s done is the surgeon himself.  The fact is that I use multiple devices for extracting grafts, with the device of choice depending on the situation at hand.  There are days when a motorized technique is best and days when a manual technique is best.  There are days when a straight-wall trephine is best and days when a flared-wall trephine is best.  There are days when a straight-edge trephine is best and days when a serrated-edge trephine is best.  This argument reminds me of guys arguing which is better, a straight-edge screwdriver or a Phillips screwdriver.  Of course the answer is that it depends on the situation at hand.  Also remember, there are some talented surgeons who can use every technology effectively and some who, despite having the best of the best instruments, can’t extract quality grafts on a consistent basis.  When it’s all said and done, it’s not the instrument that matters as much as the surgeon choosing the instrument to use for the situation at hand.  

If you place the world’s finest and most expensive Steinway piano in front of most people, very few would be able to generate a beautiful song.  On the other hand, place one of the world’s top five pianists in front of a Walmart special keyboard and you will probably hear some darn good tunes.

 

[Szotz_257]

45 minutes ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

This is misinformation which is factually incorrect. Here’s a quote from highly-esteemed Dr. Konior

The mostly useless topic of manual versus motorized should be relegated to the trash heap.  It may have held relevance at some point in time, but it means little today.  Patients should also be leery of dogmatic statements made about how an individual conducts his or her practice as the only person who can provide definitive detail as to what is done and how it’s done is the surgeon himself.  The fact is that I use multiple devices for extracting grafts, with the device of choice depending on the situation at hand.  There are days when a motorized technique is best and days when a manual technique is best.  There are days when a straight-wall trephine is best and days when a flared-wall trephine is best.  There are days when a straight-edge trephine is best and days when a serrated-edge trephine is best.  This argument reminds me of guys arguing which is better, a straight-edge screwdriver or a Phillips screwdriver.  Of course the answer is that it depends on the situation at hand.  Also remember, there are some talented surgeons who can use every technology effectively and some who, despite having the best of the best instruments, can’t extract quality grafts on a consistent basis.  When it’s all said and done, it’s not the instrument that matters as much as the surgeon choosing the instrument to use for the situation at hand.  

If you place the world’s finest and most expensive Steinway piano in front of most people, very few would be able to generate a beautiful song.  On the other hand, place one of the world’s top five pianists in front of a Walmart special keyboard and you will probably hear some darn good tunes.

 

Hi Melvin. First, not to be pedantic, but there are no factual statements that could technically constitute misinformation in my post. In fact, I make clear that these statements are based on individual perception ("seem"), and my personal opinions ("in my opinion"). 

Second – while I respect Konior a great deal – a statement by a physician, however well-respected, is not high-quality evidence. For example, you will also find physicians that are still endorsing ARTAS. For conclusive evidence we would need controlled studies, of which none exist, to my knowledge. His statement does not amount to much more than "motorized may be proper to use in certain cases", which I agree with, and is not a wholesale endorsement of the technique as a replacement for manual FUE.

I had a lengthy discussion about this in another thread, which I suggest you check out. Long story short, having reviewed hundreds of patient results over the years, I am convinced that motorized FUE will almost always produce worse results in terms of long-term graft survival than manual FUE. Better tools and extractor skill can close the gap somewhat, but not entirely. There are logical reasons for this, more specifically that the grafts are exposed to more heat, force and torque with motorized than with manual. Moreover, the extractor loses the feedback and fine sense of control during extraction. I have no hard data to back this up and therefore need to qualify my statements carefully, but I am working to compile a set of before/afters that could help shed some light on the issue.

Edited December 1, 2019 by Szotz_257

[Melvin- Admin]

3 minutes ago, Szotz_257 said:

Hi Melvin. First, not to be pedantic, but there are no factual statements that could technically constitute misinformation in my post. In fact, I make clear that these statements are based on individual perception ("seem"), and my personal opinions ("in my opinion"). 

Second – while I respect Konior a great deal – a statement by a physician, however well-respected, is not high-quality evidence. For example, you will also find physicians that are still endorsing ARTAS. For conclusive evidence we would need controlled studies, of which none exist, to my knowledge. His statement does not amount to much more than "motorized may be proper to use in certain cases", which I agree with, and is not a wholesale endorsement of the technique as a replacement for manual FUE.

I had a lengthy discussion about this in another thread, which I suggest you check out. Long story short, having reviewed hundreds of patient results over the years, I am convinced that motorized FUE will almost always produce worse results in terms of long-term graft survival than manual FUE. Better tools and extractor skill can close the gap somewhat, but not entirely. There are logical reasons for this, more specifically that the grafts are exposed to more heat, force and torque with motorized than with manual. I have no hard data to back this up and therefore need to qualify my statements carefully, but I am working to compile a set of before/afters that could help shed some light on the issue.

Poor results are attributed to the individual using the tool, not the tool. ARTAS is not the problem, the problem is it’s being sold to surgeons with no experience or skill in hair restoration. 
 

I’ve already discussed this in great detail with several surgeons. FUE by nature will cause more friction on the grafts. Using a manual tool doesn’t stop that. This whole “manual over motorized” is nonsense. 
 

Unfortunately, a lot of black market FUE clinics perform surgery with motorized tools. As previously mentioned, the poor results are due to unlicensed technicians using the tool, not the tool itself. Tools are just tools, and what matters is the person using the tool. 
 

This will be my last reply on this subject, and id appreciate it if you no longer touch on this subject on this thread, as it de-rails the purpose of the thread, which are OP’s results. If you’d like to continue this discussion, id encourage you to start a new thread. 

[Scott Medikemos]

28 minutes ago, Szotz_257 said:

Hi Melvin. First, not to be pedantic, but there are no factual statements that could technically constitute misinformation in my post. In fact, I make clear that these statements are based on individual perception ("seem"), and my personal opinions ("in my opinion"). 

Second – while I respect Konior a great deal – a statement by a physician, however well-respected, is not high-quality evidence. For example, you will also find physicians that are still endorsing ARTAS. For conclusive evidence we would need controlled studies, of which none exist, to my knowledge. His statement does not amount to much more than "motorized may be proper to use in certain cases", which I agree with, and is not a wholesale endorsement of the technique as a replacement for manual FUE.

I had a lengthy discussion about this in another thread, which I suggest you check out. Long story short, having reviewed hundreds of patient results over the years, I am convinced that motorized FUE will almost always produce worse results in terms of long-term graft survival than manual FUE. Better tools and extractor skill can close the gap somewhat, but not entirely. There are logical reasons for this, more specifically that the grafts are exposed to more heat, force and torque with motorized than with manual. Moreover, the extractor loses the feedback and fine sense of control during extraction. I have no hard data to back this up and therefore need to qualify my statements carefully, but I am working to compile a set of before/afters that could help shed some light on the issue.

You have defeated your own argument here by acknowledging that there are no controlled studies.  I am unclear as to why you consider that your  own (baseless) opinion, which is backed-up with no evidence whatsoever, is superior to that of a physician, but your agenda is clear.  You are doing the community a disservice saying that clinics should be ruled-out based on nothing more than a hunch, however I am sure that people will see your comments for what they are and completely disregard them in any event.