Is strip method dead?

[goozer]

Is strip method dead? Does everyone only do FUE?

[Dazed]

For guys who can wear their hair real short I guess it is.  Being a guy who looks horrible with real short hair the strip method will live on.  I found dealing with the HORRIBLE haircut after FUE very annoying.  I really can't say which procedure is medically better, I had both, but it is so much easier to deal with the FUT after surgery if you need to return to normal life soon.

[RecessionProof]

I don't think it's dead, a lot of doctors still advise that patients start with FUT to maximize lifetime donor yield. It's also much cheaper in most cases, and a good surgeon can usually make the scar small enough so that it's not an issue for most people.

[LaserCap]

No, not dead at all.  And, it will probably continue for a long time.  (Practice does make perfect).  As RecessionProof noted, good surgeons can make the scar almost undetectable.

Consider that the reason to do a hair transplant is to have more hair, not less.  So, if you are going to let the hair grow, why not take advantage of all the donor area can offer?  By considering both FUT and FUE now you are allowing yourself a greater possibility of a fuller looking set of hair, (depending on your initial classification and ongoing hair loss).  

Lastly, typically there is a safe zone in the donor area that is harvested at the time of the procedure.  This is almost always true with FUT.  But, if you've noticed, most times FUE will include harvesting from the entire back, including the nape area and high up on the donor. Suppose down the road this same patient thins from the top down or experiences retrograde alopecia.  All the grafts harvested from these areas will also eventually thin.  

[Shifty]

Higher yield of graft survival, easier to obtain more grafts per session Also consider with a good Micro-pigmentation job the scar is almost unnoticeable. Its actually a better option just people don't want to have their heads cut open IMO  lol

[Melvin- Admin]

No strip method isn’t dead. There are still several surgeons who perform both, but I do think FUE has become more popular over the years. Check out Feller and Bloxam both surgeons perform strip regularly and recommend it over FUE.

[Dr Blake Bloxham]

Excellent replies in this thread. So nice to see a good balance of opinion and deference for both techniques on the forum! And thank you for the mention, Melvin! 

Interestingly enough, the President of the ISHRS just wrote an excellent piece this month on the importance of both techniques thriving and working in concert with one another to benefit the patient. I will have to share it here later as long as it is okay with everyone. 

[harry_potter1]

I think patients in this industry can be broadly categorized into 2 groups:

1-Those with low NW scale, i.e just hairline recession who want to make their hairline perfect.

2-Those with advanced/diffused hair loss, those who would appreciate having hair back and just turning from bald into balding.

I think in group 1, FUE has beaten FUT by big margin atm. You will rarely see patients getting strip for less than 2K grafts etc. 

For 2nd option, I still think FUT has the edge, there is some great FUE cases performed  but overwhelming majority it seems FUT is the better options to start with, and this is where FUT strive, clinics like Konior, H&W,Blake & Feller & Hattingen among others are all doing this great FUT advanced cases on regular basis

 

 

5 hours ago, Dr Blake Bloxham said:

I will have to share it here later as long as it is okay with everyone. 

That will be really appreciated 

[Al - Moderator]

I was 22 years old when I had my first hair transplant. I am now 52. If the current methods of FUT and FUE were available when I started and knowing how my hair loss progressed, I would have been much better off with FUT. I could have had 3 or 4 FUT surgeries and only have one scar. The hair would all have been taken from the best and longest lasting donor area, so it would have lasted much longer than FUE. If I had FUE I would have had to have grafts taken from a large area due to me being a NW5 / NW6 and I would have lost all of the hair in parts of the donor area as I went to NW 7 over the years and thus I would have lost a lot of grafts that had been placed in the recipient area as well. Further FUEs through the years to try to keep up with my hair loss would have had to be done in a smaller and smaller donor area due to the increasing size of the balding area that would have been stretching well into the original FUE donor area which would have left me with severe donor thinning. There is no way FUE would have worked for me. I would have been losing grafts within the first 2 or 3 years. FUT with todays methods would have lasted at least 25 years if I had several FUTs over the years as my hair loss increased.

I've said before that in general I believe FUE is great for the short term, but FUT is better for the long term.

 

 

Edited May 25, 2019 by BeHappy

[Melvin- Admin]

21 hours ago, Dr Blake Bloxham said:

Excellent replies in this thread. So nice to see a good balance of opinion and deference for both techniques on the forum! And thank you for the mention, Melvin! 

Interestingly enough, the President of the ISHRS just wrote an excellent piece this month on the importance of both techniques thriving and working in concert with one another to benefit the patient. I will have to share it here later as long as it is okay with everyone. 

Dr. Tykocinski, he's great and also a big proponent for strip as well. Another thing that we need to stress is the amount of "black market" FUE clinics are popping up all around the world. Please share the article when you get a chance.