Donor restocking- top doctors

[A Fue Good Men]

Who are some of the best names in regards to donor restocking for over-harvested fue extraction areas? I’ve seen a few posts regarding Dr. Mwamba with good results.

 

Who else would be fit for the job?

[Melvin- Admin]

Dr. Bisanga is definitely a too notch doctor. But I wouldn’t put too much faith in the whole restocking thing. It’s best to preserve the donor, as it is equally as important visually speaking as the recipient. 

[A Fue Good Men]

1 hour ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

Dr. Bisanga is definitely a too notch doctor. But I wouldn’t put too much faith in the whole restocking thing. It’s best to preserve the donor, as it is equally as important visually speaking as the recipient. 

Thanks for the response Melvin. Why do you not have much faith in donor restocking?

[Melvin- Admin]

13 hours ago, 5BetaReductase said:

Thanks for the response Melvin. Why do you not have much faith in donor restocking?

Because it’s not a viable option. If you’ve depleted your donor enough for needing restocking, you’ve approached surgery the wrong way. The goal should always be to preserve the integrity of the donor. Because you don’t want to trade one thin area for another. If it were a good option, more surgeons would do it.

[A Fue Good Men]

1 hour ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

Because it’s not a viable option. If you’ve depleted your donor enough for needing restocking, you’ve approached surgery the wrong way. The goal should always be to preserve the integrity of the donor. Because you don’t want to trade one thin area for another. If it were a good option, more surgeons would do it.

Hi Melvin,

I see you’re point. I guess my situation is a bit different. I went with a pretty well known doctor and about 30-40% of my donor was more aggressively harvested compared to the other side so it stands out. I’m looking at trying to get the overharvested side more evened out.

[Melvin- Admin]

12 minutes ago, 5BetaReductase said:

Hi Melvin,

I see you’re point. I guess my situation is a bit different. I went with a pretty well known doctor and about 30-40% of my donor was more aggressively harvested compared to the other side so it stands out. I’m looking at trying to get the overharvested side more evened out.

If that’s the case restocking wouldn’t be the best option. Another procedure could even out the extractions a bit more to make it look homogeneous. 

[Curious25]

3 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

Because it’s not a viable option. If you’ve depleted your donor enough for needing restocking, you’ve approached surgery the wrong way. The goal should always be to preserve the integrity of the donor. Because you don’t want to trade one thin area for another. If it were a good option, more surgeons would do it.

It’d be good if you could arrange an IG live with Dr Mwamba, and talk to him around this topic, because he seems to be pioneering this movement at the moment.

Mustangs case is brilliant, and if you keep your donor short, I still haven’t heard any good reasoning from other surgeons as to why it isn’t a viable strategy. 
 

Yes, you are transplanting an extra time than if you just did BHT straight to recipient - however how often do we hear that BHT, although good, isn’t like for like to native scalp hair, and can only really play a role as a filler? 
 

Therefore, if you wish to have a strong looking recipient, and your donor is kept short - it makes far more sense to me, to have the ‘fillers’ placed in the donor region, even more so when the angulation of hairs on this area of the head are facing downwards, therefore the scalp is not as adversely affected by reflecting light. 
 

If the main argument is that each surgery carries risk, therefore it’s risk mitigation in the sense of the patient undergoing less procedures, I think that’s a bit of a cop out excuse as well. If the patient has proven to exhibit good growth from previous surgeries, there is no reason as to why under a good surgeons hands, he wouldn’t experience yield from donor restocking. 
 

I believe this will gain momentum in years to come. 

[A Fue Good Men]

2 hours ago, Melvin-Moderator said:

If that’s the case restocking wouldn’t be the best option. Another procedure could even out the extractions a bit more to make it look homogeneous. 

I’ve thought about that as well. But I’m at a point with my restoration where I would only want minor tweaks so I don’t think it would be enough grafts to make a better visual impact (until the time comes when I lose more hair)

[deeznuts]

I mean I can see why body hair would let you push the limits on the numbers transplanted.

If you have 5000 grafts transplanted, with 1000 hairs left in the donor...

You could transplant 1500 (i.e. overharvest), and mix it 50-50 (not sure the exact ratios that doctors use) into your scalp for 3000 grafts. And then put 500 back into your donor. 

Whereas, if you just relied on what your donor could give you, you would just be getting 2000 grafts if you mixed it 50-50 with body hair. 

The amount of hair I would speculate in my completely made up hypothetical scenario, assuming that scalp/body hair was mixed into your donor at a 50-50 ratio would be roughly 20 or 25% extra donor as you would harvest 70-80% of your donor, replenish 20%/25% with body hair to get to ~40-50% original density.

It makes a lot of sense because the donor is super valuable yet we don't ever mix the hairs in the donor with body hair even though in theory we should. Like it makes no sense that some people have a midscalp with 50-50 bodyhair/scalp grafts, but their donor is 100% scalp.

Edited May 20, 2021 by deeznuts

[Curious25]

7 minutes ago, deeznuts said:

Like it makes no sense that some people have a midscalp with 50-50 bodyhair/scalp grafts, but their donor is 100% scalp.

This 

[mmokin]

On 5/20/2021 at 2:19 PM, Melvin- Moderator said:

Because it’s not a viable option. If you’ve depleted your donor enough for needing restocking, you’ve approached surgery the wrong way. The goal should always be to preserve the integrity of the donor. Because you don’t want to trade one thin area for another. If it were a good option, more surgeons would do it.

is it because it is hard for the surgeon to do or the final result is not natural?

of course i understand people shouldnt plan to do donor restocking before the first HT but it is a contingency plan like smp if you are already in a bad spot after getting overharvested from a surgery you regret having.

from this perspective are there actually any issues with using body hair from beard, chest etc for the donor?

[BDK081522]

On 5/19/2021 at 6:19 PM, Melvin- Moderator said:

Dr. Bisanga is definitely a too notch doctor. But I wouldn’t put too much faith in the whole restocking thing. It’s best to preserve the donor, as it is equally as important visually speaking as the recipient. 

@Melvin- Moderator Have your views on this changed now that you've presumably had your last procedure with one of the world's best clinics?

Edited January 4, 2022 by BDK081522

[BDK081522]

On 5/20/2021 at 9:19 AM, Melvin- Moderator said:

Because it’s not a viable option. If you’ve depleted your donor enough for needing restocking, you’ve approached surgery the wrong way. The goal should always be to preserve the integrity of the donor. Because you don’t want to trade one thin area for another. If it were a good option, more surgeons would do it.

@Melvin- ModeratorDoes this sentiment still hold true as well?