FUT Any Regrets?

[hairyharry]

I'm scheduled for an FUT with a highly regarded surgeon this coming May. My surgeon recommended FUT saying he could get more bang for the buck/follicles/better result for the money. I'm starting to have second thoughts about whether I should do FUT or FUE. I like my sides and back relatively short and afraid I'll regret having the scar. Is this just jitters or has anyone who has had an FUT regret it and wished they had done an FUE?

Edited January 11, 2022 by hairyharry

[JDEE0]

What's your situation? Any pics to share to see your NW level etc? Some people might really need to go FUT first to maximise grafts, but it's not necessary for most; many top doctors have come out in recent times and unequivocally stated that FUT is no longer superior to FUE in any way, such as Hasson in his most recent interview with Melvin, and has even said that he much prefers FUE now and gets better results with this method at this point.

Personally, I would never get FUT due to the scar, if you like to wear your hair short then yes you'll probably regret the scar. If you really don't need FUT and you're just consulting with a surgeon who is very pro FUT, such as someone like Bloxham, for the sake of it and this has pigeonholed you into accepting, then I would reconsider.

 

[FUT4000]

2 minutes ago, JDEE0 said:

What's your situation? Any pics to share to see your NW level etc? Some people might really need to go FUT first to maximise grafts, but it's not necessary for most; many top doctors have come out in recent times and unequivocally stated that FUT is no longer superior to FUE in any way, such as Hasson in his most recent interview with Melvin, and has even said that he much prefers FUE now and gets better results with this method at this point.

Personally, I would never get FUT due to the scar, if you like to wear your hair short then yes you'll probably regret the scar. If you really don't need FUT and you're just consulting with a surgeon who is very pro FUT, such as someone like Bloxham, for the sake of it and this has pigeonholed you into accepting, then I would reconsider.

 

Honestly the only time you can really see a fut scar is when you literally shave your head. You can get away with wearing your hair short and doing a lower taper fade if you're worried. 

[FUT4000]

21 minutes ago, hairyharry said:

I'm scheduled for an FUT with a highly regarded surgeon this coming May. My surgeon recommended FUT saying he could get more bang for the buck/follicles/better result for the money. I'm starting to have second thoughts about whether I should do FUT or FUE. I like my sides and back relatively short and afraid I'll regret having the scar. Is this just jitters or has anyone who has had an FUT regret it and wished they had done an FUE?

From your previous post, you need 3500, which is a decent amount. The surgeon will most likely get more and you really do need to go FUT to maximize your graft count. 

Edited January 11, 2022 by rambunctious

[JDEE0]

1 minute ago, rambunctious said:

Honestly the only time you can really see a fut scar is when you literally shave your head. You can get away with wearing your hair short and doing a lower taper fade if you're worried. 

Not really true though, no one knows how the scar will heal, if it will be pencil thin, if it will stretch, and so on. I'd wager that the vast majority with an average FUT scar can not wear their hear below a 4 guard or so without seeing something. I can literally have a mid skin fade and see nothing with my FUE scars, not going to be on the cards with FUT.

Besides, like I said, if he really 'needs' to go FUT, then that's fair enough. If he doesn't, then why do so? 

[FUT4000]

17 minutes ago, JDEE0 said:

Not really true though, no one knows how the scar will heal, if it will be pencil thin, if it will stretch, and so on. I'd wager that the vast majority with an average FUT scar can not wear their hear below a 4 guard or so without seeing something. I can literally have a mid skin fade and see nothing with my FUE scars, not going to be on the cards with FUT.

Besides, like I said, if he really 'needs' to go FUT, then that's fair enough. If he doesn't, then why do so? 

Of course if you can go fue then that's fine, but if his surgeon is recommending FUT, then that's the treatment plan for him. You cannot however come on here and make false claims that "many top doctors" claims FUE is better than FUT. please show me actual scientific evidence as this has been proven time and time again that they are both equal procedures in terms of success. 

Edited January 11, 2022 by rambunctious

[Melvin- Admin]

Can you share pictures? In my opinion, FUT is useful if you’re a Norwood 6/7, but I wouldn’t recommend FUT for anyone Norwood 4 and below. The recovery time, invasiveness, etc, just isn’t worth it.

[JDEE0]

48 minutes ago, rambunctious said:

Of course if you can go fue then that's fine, but if his surgeon is recommending FUT, then that's the treatment plan for him. You cannot however come on here and make false claims that "many top doctors" claims FUE is better than FUT. please show me actual scientific evidence as this has been proven time and time again that they are both equal procedures in terms of success. 

Haha, I can't come on here and make - false - claims that many top doctors claim FUE is better than FUT? 

Well, firstly if you use some reading comprehension and actually read what I wrote, I said the following, and I quote: "Many top doctors have come out in recent times and unequivocally stated that FUT is no longer superior to FUE in any way". How is that me saying that FUE is better than FUT.... what on earth are you even talking about. I quite literally said that FUT is no longer considered to be superior to FUT anymore (as it was in the past) by many top doctors (if you want names: Bisanga, Hasson/Wong have both stated in interviews with Melvin that this is the case... also pretty much any Iberian doctor such as Dr. Pinto, who performed surgery on me, but also De Freitas, Couto, Lorenzo and so on clearly believe this).

So please, highlight where I said that FUE is better than FUT? If you bothered to actually take the time to think about what you write before coming off all argumentative for absolutely no reason, you would have realised that I didn't. Me saying that FUT is no longer considered superior to FUE simply means that it's no longer considered better, i.e. it's not seen to be more viable or have have better survival rates anymore by said doctors above.. the fact that for some reason you interpret this as me saying FUE is better is your issue.

I then went on to give an example of a doctor, Dr. Hasson, who himself said in his most recent interview with Melvin that he personally far prefers FUE to FUT in the vast majority of cases these days, and that he personally feels he gets better results with this technique nowadays with his patients due to the advancement of technology and refinement of skill... go and watch it.

I agree that the two are generally equal in terms of growth etc in a good surgeons hands, so I'm not really sure what you're going on about.... why would I want to find 'scientific evidence' of something I don't believe to be true or never claimed in the first place?

The funny thing is, you're the one spreading misinformation and making false claims, not me. You tell OP that the only time you can see an FUT scar is when you "literally shave your head" and that he can "get away with wearing his hair short". Absolute crap and you have no idea what you're talking about. Most peoples FUT scars will be visible way before they are at a 0 or 1 guard, and although, sure, it is possible he would be able to wear his hair short and not have a visible scar at very short lengths, why are you telling him this as a matter of fact when scarring is largely about individual physiology? You have no idea how he will heal, whether his scar will stretch, whether it will just heal wide to begin with, whether his surgeon will do a good job incising, and so on...

 

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by JDEE0

[SLA]

I had a consultation recently with a top doctor recommended here who has vast experience doing FUT & FUE and who still offers FUT. He advised me to do FUE + beard over 2 surgeries for a total of 7-8k grafts (5-5k scalp & 2-2.5k beard). Mind you, I am probably about at a NW6, have relatively fine (yet curly hair) and don't have the most robust donor (he said he could harvest 6-6.5k scalp grafts over a lifetime- which would be 40% of my donor).

When I asked about FUT to maximize, he said that what happens is sometimes (or maybe he said 'many' times), the hair below an FUT scar miniaturizes rendering him unable to harvest those hairs. In his eyes given my situation, it would be less risky to do FUE.

I got the impression that he now only does FUT when a patient says they want as much hair in one sitting and of course doesn't mind the scar.

Also, as I am seeing now with FUE is that there are doctors who feel comfortable harvesting more than 40% of the donor and homogenously depleting and blending. @mustangis a good example. Perhaps this is also the case with @Zoomsterand @Melvin- Moderator(but not sure). There is a recent example of this from Dr. Pittella in the results posted by clinics section of the forum.

So what I am learning is while FUT and then FUE in a perfect situation might get you +/- 1,500 more grafts over a lifetime, it does not always work this way in a real world situation....and going strategically beyond the recommended 40% harvesting rule with FUE could potentially be an option.

Hope this helps!

 

[Melvin- Admin]

I think FUT has its place and in general for most doctors who do FUT and FUE, yes yield is slightly higher for FUT. However, that’s dependent on the surgeon. I do believe that in general you could probably get 2,000 grafts more going FUT first, but that is of course if you need 10k+ grafts.

So far I’ve had over 7k grafts via scalp FUE. I could possibly push it to 8k we’ll see, someone like me should consider FUT, but if you have minor frontal loss, definitely not, just my opinion. 

[Britanium]

Ok so it depends on who the Dr/Clinic is… some are particularly good at FUT and the scar will most likely end up pencil like thin. However even with the best Dr in the world the risk of a wider scar is still possible. And yes for the higher Norwoods it will give you the best chance of fully maximising your donor area. 
I have had x2 FUT and x3 FUE and have unfortunately ended up with a poor FUT scar, it’s been revised and it still not good. I would only have done 1 FUT and then gone to FUE. 
If you look at the Drs/Clinics worldwide it’s only really the US that are doing more FUT cases. Apart from perhaps Hattingen who are very skilled with either FUT or FUE. 
Dr Bisnaga occasionally will do combo cases using both FUT/FUE together. Medispa also does combo cases. When I think of starting out with FUT I would say H+W, Hattingen and Dr Bloxham usually spring to mind. 
 

[Melvin- Admin]

2 minutes ago, JC71 said:

Ok so it depends on who the Dr/Clinic is… some are particularly good at FUT and the scar will most likely end up pencil like thin. However even with the best Dr in the world the risk of a wider scar is still possible. And yes for the higher Norwoods it will give you the best chance of fully maximising your donor area. 
I have had x2 FUT and x3 FUE and have unfortunately ended up with a poor FUT scar, it’s been revised and it still not good. I would only have done 1 FUT and then gone to FUE. 
If you look at the Drs/Clinics worldwide it’s only really the US that are doing more FUT cases. Apart from perhaps Hattingen who are very skilled with either FUT or FUE. 
Dr Bisnaga occasionally will do combo cases using both FUT/FUE together. Medispa also does combo cases. When I think of starting out with FUT I would say H+W, Hattingen and Dr Bloxham usually spring to mind. 
 

In North America there are a lot of good FUT clinics, Cooley, Gabel, Glenn Charles, Konior, etc. The benefit of getting FUT is it's a lot cheaper than FUE. Unfortunately, clinics are moving further away from doing FUT. Dr. Hasson said he did maybe 3 or 4 last year, out of over 300 cases. 

[AlexMeister21]

I think people would regret FUT if their hair becomes too thin to hide the scar. I went with FUT with the expectation that I'll have to seek and get some kind of scar repair work within the next 20-30 years. If your hairloss pattern looks like it'll be advanced where you will need a lot of lifetime grafts, then FUT may be the better option. Otherwise, FUE would probably be better in the long run.

[Britanium]

2 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

In North America there are a lot of good FUT clinics, Cooley, Gabel, Glenn Charles, Konior, etc. The benefit of getting FUT is it's a lot cheaper than FUE. Unfortunately, clinics are moving further away from doing FUT. Dr. Hasson said he did maybe 3 or 4 last year, out of over 300 cases. 

Yeh I have seen the shift much more toward FUE even the last few years. FUT is just not happening in places like Turkey - Europe. Maybe in 5 to 10 years it will even be a rarity in the US. 
I still think it has its place. 

Edited January 11, 2022 by JC71

[TEXAN35]

This is a very important topic. Next to choosing a good doctor is the decision of FUE or FUT+FUE.

I know this question is applicable to NW 5,6,7 but even when we are NW3 or NW4 in 20s and 30s we can get to NW6,7 in 40s or 50s . I am having similar questions even though I am NW3 but I think I will become NW6 finally.

2-3 thousand of good FUT grafts for hairline then FUE/BHT for CROWN doesnt seem a bad idea.

Maybe we should do a survey of people who had FUT in last 10 years and regret having a scar or maybe people who have had FUT can add more info about their decision.

[Melvin- Admin]

3 minutes ago, TEXAN35 said:

This is a very important topic. Next to choosing a good doctor is the decision of FUE or FUT+FUE.

I know this question is applicable to NW 5,6,7 but even when we are NW3 or NW4 in 20s and 30s we can get to NW6,7 in 40s or 50s . I am having similar questions even though I am NW3 but I think I will become NW6 finally.

2-3 thousand of good FUT grafts for hairline then FUE/BHT for CROWN doesnt seem a bad idea.

Maybe we should do a survey of people who had FUT in last 10 years and regret having a scar or maybe people who have had FUT can add more info about their decision.

I don’t think people regret getting FUT, but a better question would be, if you had to choose today, would you still choose FUT? 10 years ago the only real option was FUT, so of course they won’t regret it. But now FUE has pretty much caught up to FUT in almost every way, even in extracting large numbers.

[Britanium]

If I started again I would be choosing FUE and Beard ! Yup even with being a higher Norwood (6) 

I just don’t think my scalp laxity was ever good enough for even 1 FUT. But years ago it was very much FUT that was being done..

 

[Melvin- Admin]

@1978matt what about you? 

[Ryan Rap]

I definitely think FUT still has its place.

For me personally, I am young and have a lot of loss and had a not so great FUT procedure during my first go around.

Imagine if I had gone with FUE. I would have 2-3k less grafts over a lifetime when I truly will need every one, and who knows what my donor would have looked like. 

I think FUT first gives you flexibility and breathing room should your first procedure not go as you thought it would, or if you get hair greed and want as much density and hair as possible (as a lot of us do)

FUT definitely still has its place, but obviously it’s based on the OPs situation. 

[1978matt]

If you have a good chance of being NW5 or worse I think having at least one good size FUT first is a good option.  NW4 or lower you should be good for FUE alone.

I've had nearly 13,000 hairs moved in total: 8000 FUT and 5000 FUE.  The FUE resulted in the most noticeable change in the donor area.  To imagine having started with 8000 FUE (instead of FUT) would have completely exhausted the donor area and left very little in reserve.  That might be fine if I never progress beyond NW5, but there's no guarrantees.

Even with the better FUE techniques I think I'd still start FUT for my own particular case.  I can shave the sides to a grade 4 comfortably though a grade 3 is not quite so good on one side.  That said, it would need to be someone who knew about HTs to know it was an FUT scar.

I feel as though I gained about 3000 grafts in reserve from taking this approach.  You trade a scar for the fullest possible outcome on top.

Though not ideal, with a proper doctor i don't think an FUT scar should be any worse than 3-4mm, in which case you could put 300 FUE grafts into it if it really bothered you.

Edited January 11, 2022 by 1978matt

[hairyharry]

My understanding from my surgeon is that FUE can be used to cover the scar left from FUT if needed. He's even offered to use this approach at no extra charge if I'm not happy with the scar once it's healed. Also, it appears because of my level of hair loss that the FUT would yield significantly more grafts. 

[Klh34]

I think 1978 Matt makes a good point. It is false to say FUE has no noticeable effect on your donor areas appearance. In fact, even a wide FUT scar is easier to hide and easier to fix than a donor area overharvested from FUE. You can't take the best case scenario from one method and compare it to the worst case of the other, both methods look great when done right and both look awful when done wrong.

[Melvin- Admin]

13 minutes ago, hairyharry said:

My understanding from my surgeon is that FUE can be used to cover the scar left from FUT if needed. He's even offered to use this approach at no extra charge if I'm not happy with the scar once it's healed. Also, it appears because of my level of hair loss that the FUT would yield significantly more grafts. 

Can you share some pictures? FUT scars can be treated with BHT + smp, but there’s no guarantees the scar won’t stretch. It’s important to get non biased information from a surgeon who does both FUT and FUE equally. Someone like Konior, Nadimi. 

[NARMAK]

I have watched a lot of videos and gone back and forth on whether to go FUT for my first procedure or just stick with FUE. 

Now whilst Melvin mentioned FUT being more suited long term for a high Norwood case or if you are young, have rapid hair loss and probably projected to go a high Norwood in the future sooner rather than later. 

For younger guys, hairstyles being fades etc. is why most don't like the linear scar look and the regrown hair hides FUE scars better. 

That said, i kind of understand the logic of FUT. You take a strip and hopefully are fortunate that you are on the right side for elasticity and healing of the linear scar and over time it actually heals as a thin line. Then due to the FUT you hopefully in the hands of a skilled surgeon have a nice selection of grafts and because the FUT strips taken out, then the two sides closed the "density" i guess doesn't maybe seem as affected because the total size of the linear scar may cover less surface area. 

Melvin actually has a great video on his YouTube about FUT vs FUE but techniques have been improving a lot in the last decade or so particularly imo. 

It's just gonna come down to a case by case basis and what you feel comfortable with doing. 

[aaron1234]

2 hours ago, 1978matt said:

I've had nearly 13,000 hairs moved in total: 8000 FUT and 5000 FUE.  The FUE resulted in the most noticeable change in the donor area. 

This is 100% right.  I noticed a bigger difference in my donor density from 1k grafts FUE than the six strip surgeries I underwent beforehand.  I don't regret getting FUT before FUE one bit.  Max grafts!