Senior Member parable Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 Dr. Feller's references to the Neograft machine are on a different Forum. Out of respect to the moderators on this site I won't name the forum but have a dig around and you'll find it. Now Dr. Feller, you have a video demonstrating FUE on your website. From what I can gather this is your earlier work that you did on "B'man" correct? (If I am wrong I apologise). However if this is indeed some of your earlier work then why do you keep that video on your site? From what I can tell the punch used in the video on your site is an off the shelf 'cheapo' punch? The one that left white pot mark scarring in B'mans donor area. (Correct me if I am wrong). Why don't you show or why "haven't" you shown details/videos of your new punch and techniques over the years on your site? (Confusing if you ask me).. Because now all of a sudden you explain that you have been doing an advance version of FUE (for over 3-5 years) but you choose to keep your old version of an FUE surgery (video) up on your website. It doesn't make sense!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 Parable, Why so accusatory? Rather than comment on the tool or ask questions, you attack me in a not so subtle way. Why is this? If you had read any portion of the posts I've made about FUE over the years you would see that I've described and disclosed the details of my FUE surgery for years. It's even printed in the leading Text on HT published in 2004! For the uninitiated potential HT patient, that FUE video from 2002 provides more than enough information to gain a visual understanding of the difference between FUE and strip surgery. Weather I show my tool or not makes no difference to the newbie HT researcher. Besides, a green punch looks better on camera than a surgical steel one. The reason that video is still up on my site is because it is the FIRST video of FUE ever released on the internet. At the time it was very signfiicant because every other doctor claiming to offer FUE REFUSED to publicize HOW they did it. They shrouded their techniques in mystery and used "intellectual propriety" as the reason not to educate the public or their peers. An illegal lapse of disclosure and failure to provide informed consent by the way. In it's day, that video I produced demystified FUE for thousands of doctors and potential HT patients and I was very proud to post it. I still am even though the green punch used in it was the standard Miltex disposable punch that no doctor should ever use for FUE today (although MANY do). It was the problems with this punch that lead me to design a specialized FUE punch that could do a better job. The patient in that video is NOT Balloonman, but a man named Alex from White Plains, NY who volunteered to be one of my first FUE patients. I did not charge him a dime for his participation, nor the hundreds of people who volunteered to allow me to perform small FUE cases on them so that I could study the procedure and build my skill level BEFORE offering it to the public for a fee. There are many things I would like to put on my website, unfortunately, it's a pain to get my website person to make the changes as I would like them,so instead I post regularly on the forums. Many of my tools and innovations have been posted online and discussed in detail. Just because they are not on my website doesn't mean I haven't disclosed them. Just search my name online around 2003-2004 and you will see quite a bit of disclosure of my methods and tools. The only technology I held back from showing online were my powered tools. That took more time to perfect than my manual tools, and I wanted to make VERY sure that they worked better than manual tools before presenting it. This is in sharp contrast to other clinics that claimed superior new technologies to their potential patients, but had no results to back it up. I would not allow my instrumentation to fall into that catagory and waited until I saw grown out results. Unlike EVERY other FUE instrument presented to the world, THIS one has an acutal track record of SUCCESS. On this very forum is a recent patient-GROWN OUT- on whom I performed TWO FUE procedure with this very tool. Here is a photo of the Feller Punch that I posted on this site back in 2004. The same technology that went into this unique punch went into the punches used in my new motorized FUE scoring tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member hopefull Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 Originally posted by Dr. Alan Feller:Parable, Why so accusatory? Rather than comment on the tool or ask questions, you attack me in a not so subtle way. Why is this? Hey i asked on the tool lol. What is it how it works different than the normal tools? Why is it different and better? Is it for making the procedure better and more trustworthy for the best FUE doctors?does it make a difference to them? or its only for the ones that have no clue and wish to learn? should we believe everything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 Sorry Hopeful, most of that last post was in direct response to Parable's post which seemed more interested in impugning my credibility than inquiring about this new instrument. A design I went to great lengths to create, test, and now present to the medical community and the HT community. In short, this tool makes it FAR easier for the novice doctor to enter the FUE field, AND for the veteran FUE doctor to improve his yields and speed while reducing fatigue. How does it do it? The tool is a part of an overall FUE method that also includes something pioneered at Feller Medical known as "perforation" technique. Combined, the tool and Perforation work by decreasing the three most detrimental forces associated with MANUAL FUE procedures (Torsion, Traction, Compression); as well as decreasing the two most detrimental forces associated with POWERED FUE (Torsion and Heat). Yes, it will even improve the procedures of the more trustworthy and experienced FUE doctors. Untrustworthy ones too. The tool is not a magic wand. It will not allow for a 100% success rate with respect to attempted extractions-that's just not a realistic expectation for any instrument, but I'm positive that it will ALWAYS perform better than manual FUE methods. I, for one, will NEVER go back to manual FUE again. Let's keep this tool in perspective and not allow it to be hyped into something it's not. But it is safe to say that no matter who performs FUE, if they incorporate this device into their practice they will perform BETTER and FASTER FUE with less fatigue than if they didn't have it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Mr. GQ Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 hmmm it's still somewhat abstract and ambiguous for us laymen to understand the "perforation technique" but i trust you when you said "more to come". plus if a picture speaks thousand words, then a nice practical HD video would be great and i'd say it would speak volume, appx. ~1 million words. cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 To me the attributes and advantages of the method and tools are obvious, but perhaps it's harder for non-practitioners to envision. I will post some video soon that may make it a bit clearer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Abedogg Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 Dr. Feller, With the use of this tool and mutliple techs doing placement is it possible to do the mega FUE sessions we hear about? How many grafts can you currently do in a day via fue with this tool? Thanks! Abe Had 3k With Umar on Feb 16, 2009 My Hair Loss Website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member hopefull Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 Originally posted by Abedogg:Dr. Feller, With the use of this tool and mutliple techs doing placement is it possible to do the mega FUE sessions we hear about? How many grafts can you currently do in a day via fue with this tool? Thanks! Abe Yeah good question abedogg i also thought of that. Dr.Feller with this tool does your view chage regarding FUE transplants?Do you still feel the best approach is a combination of strip and FUE or now FUE can stand on its own on large balding areas? Would you trust to completely convert your practice to all FUE? should we believe everything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted March 31, 2009 Author Share Posted March 31, 2009 All HT clinics use multiple techs to do placement of grafts. I think you meant to ask can multiple techs do EXTRACTIONS during FUE to speed up the process and increase the overall graft count. Only licensed doctors can use a cutting instrument like this one. So when it comes to the first step of FUE-scoring around the graft- NO, multiple technicians cannot do it. Not even one. As for delivering the grafts after the scoring has been performed, the answer is really no. There really should not be more than one tech on the scalp for the delivery process because two techs would get in each others way and cause small disruptive motions to each other. Because my method utilizes Perforation, two hands are required to remove the graft from the skin and therefore takes up more space. I invited Dr. Thomas Law to join me for an FUE procedure on one of my patients last week. We extracted 1,000 grafts in just under 3 hours, which also included refining them under the microscope. We could have kept going and probably done up to 1,500 graft leisurly, but the patient only needed a thousand grafts. I could have performed 1,500 grafts manually, but I would have been very fatigued toward the last 500 grafts and quality would have suffered. With the new instrument it was a piece of cake. No fatigue at all and the case wrapped up 4.5 hours after it began- from in the door to out the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Abedogg Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 So it sounds like in a long 9 to 12 hour day you could place 3000 grafts via FUE? Abe Had 3k With Umar on Feb 16, 2009 My Hair Loss Website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member TheEmperor Posted March 31, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted March 31, 2009 Dr. Feller, In the past you have spoken about the scar tissue left behind in the donor area by FUE, and that this was not to be underestimated, that it would impact future extractions and yield. Are you now advocating full-scale adoption of FUE, or are you providing guidelines for where FUE is indicated? My understanding is that this is an adjunct to strip and will never achieve the same yield or graft count. If this tool streamines and simplifies FUE, I expect we will see a shift towards FUE out of convenience and profitability (have already seen one clinic attempt this and fail), which ultimately will be bad for the majority of patients. Please explain your position. The Emperor My Hair Loss Web Site - Hair Transplant with Dr. Wong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted April 1, 2009 Author Share Posted April 1, 2009 My position has not changed in 7 years. To me, FUE should be viewed as either an ADJUNCT to good strip surgery, OR a viable alternative to those patients who are absolutely dead-set AGAINST strip procedures. I highly doubt anyone will shift toward FUE out of convenience as strip surgeries are just so easy to perform by comparison, but I should hope with all my heart and soul that many doctors become motivated to include FUE in their practice for the sake of profitability. How else could they sustain their business and earn a living? Not everyone can expect a multi-trillion dollar bailout-that seems to be reserved for the cheaters and losers. There are definitely clinics that have tried FUE and failed-but still perform it anyway. Thankfully, it doesn't take long to find out who they are IF the public does some research on forums like this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted April 1, 2009 Author Share Posted April 1, 2009 Abedogg, Tehcnically speaking, yes, 3000 grafts could be obtained in one day. There are even clinics doing that now, but as you may know, final results have been sketchy and inconsistent at best. Why? The first reason is probably that the grafts are being damaged by the instruments being used. The second is that as a 12 hour day wears on, fatigue sets in on the part of the doctor and team and quality naturally drops. The third, but not least important, is that the grafts should go back into the head as soon as possible. In my clinic I rarely allow the grafts to sit out of the body more than 5 hours MAXIMUM. Keeping them out for twice as long could be detrimental to final yield. So I would discourage 3,000 graft per day FUE procedures. If a patient is dead-set against Strip surgery AND is informed and accepts that FUE surgery has a higher chance of producing lower yields, then I would do that patient over two days instead of one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member PLEASE GROW PLEASE Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 The only thing that worries me is that these instruments get in the wrong hands. We could very well see new places pop up all over the place offering fue with incompetent doctors. That could potentially be a disaster with them offering scarless /painless surgeries. I can already see it happening. So although a blessing it could be a curse for the uninformed . I really like your invention though. Very impressed and thats hard to do to me unless she can tie a cherry stem with her tongue and put both legs behind her back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member PLEASE GROW PLEASE Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 I had to look up willynilly. You UK guys are weird Kidding of course but it seems that anyone can buy these rotary drills and neograft machines . The problem is a surgeon could be doing breast implants for the last 5 years then all of a sudden hes designing your hairline. All you need is a doctor and two techs and you could set up shop anywhere Cheers ,see your rubbing off on me. I meant peace out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member hopefull Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 Originally posted by spex: I hear ya though. Like i said (and we will most certainly hear from the doc i am sure) I am sure the tool will not be just sold to anyone. Lol as if they have to buy this tool.There are many so called superior tools for FUE...heck if they are serious about doing business they can even create one from scratch and advertise that they invented the best tool for FUE ever.I know of a greek clinic who invented such a tool and they were the talk of the forums years ago... and another thing its hard for good doctors to adapt a tool from another doctor, that instantly means that the doctor who created it is superior to the one that bought it. but in this case the tool is not something ground breaking if it cannot make obsolete strip procedures. We need a tool that a doctor will take and say thats it "no need for stripping patients i am not afraid of low yield and damaging the grafts because now its highely unlikely to happen with my super tool."lol That will be the groundbreaking tool in my opinion, but what the heck every little helps... should we believe everything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member thanatopsis_awry Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 If this can produce quality FUE sessions for most people in the neighborhood of ~1500 that's pretty key, and offers a tremendous amount of newfound opportunity and flexibility for people. My gut is that we'll get HM/cloning before a tool that makes FUE equal to strip; but, a tool like this makes FUE a much more powerful adjunct option. My ideal is simply having the ability to harvest enough grafts to satisfy most people, even those who go onto NW6+ territory. This quasi-nullifies the dire need for HM/cloning -- though, we'll still be dealing with "perceived density" in some cases as opposed to the "true density" that HM/cloning would offer. Being able to strip yourself out and then foray into FUE with a tool that maximizes your yield while increasing session size and making the venture much more feasible on a practical level is pretty sweet. I do wonder if this would have any impact on forms of BHT...? I've always had high hopes for a tool to advance FUE while being able to sync up with reasonably quality BHT and really augment and boost our donors further. ----------- *A Follicles Dying Wish To Clinics* 1 top-down, 1 portrait, 1 side-shot, 1 hairline....4 photos. No flash. Follicles have asked for centuries, in ten languages, as many times so as to confuse a mathematician. Enough is enough! Give me documentation or give me death! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Mr. GQ Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 tell you what Hopeful, i've come to conclusion some time ago that this whole FUE thing is about commitment. i've read statements from many doctors that say fue is on par with strip in terms of its yield (granted you know what you're doin'). heck i can even quote Dr. F when he said recently that this tool produces 97% yield or that his fue patient yield should be no different just as if he had gone the strip route. see the problem is that doctors have gotten so used to "convenience" of a strip procedure and its low labor attribute for the most part that they just don't want to commit to fue 100% yet. as long as demand for strip is still there, heck why fix it when it's not broken, yet. if tables were turned and if it was the other way around and somehow this fue invention was much more convenient and easier labor-wise, i think we'd be all witnessing much more different HT industry today and a lot of us would be singing different tune. it all starts at the top and what doctors have to say. then simply it all rolls down the hill. now don't get this post twisted and don't take it the wrong way guys, as it is just my genuine opinion about fue and why its breakthrough is being met with many hurdles along its path. i honestly do not want to start another fue vs. strip debate again as we have seen way too many of those in the past. it was just meant to be some food for thought for my man hopefull. cheers ya'll and happy april fool's day Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member PLEASE GROW PLEASE Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 Your post GQ is one MAJOR reason I believe alot of clinics want no part of fue. Think about it with strip a doctor is in the room 35% of the time and with fue probably 90% Why stand when you can sit. I think that only the doctors that have a true love for hair restoration and their potential patients will adopt fue. Its rapidly evolving and theres no denying that. If I was just starting to bald I would stay ahead of it by fue and low dose meds . You could always do a strip later if your baldness rapidly increases . If I was a doctor just starting out I would learn fue first. A monkey could do strip but it takes talent,dedication and patience for fue. Im still a big believer in strip but not to offer both is sending a message that your in this short term. Half the pms I get are about what fue docs to go to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Mr. GQ Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 right, and speaking hypotethicly if i were a brand new doctor to this hair restoration field this is how i'd deal with the "fatigue" issue. i'd make a partnership with another equally good as me doctor straight up (parhaps a friend from the same university). so when i get tired, my other half/MD takes over the extraction process or what not. plus i'm sure there are tons of loopholes in health system that techs can do it without a slap on the wrist from the medical board. we see planty of clinics do that right now as i'm typing this. now retraining them is a whole new ball game. FUE is 3X more expensive or even if it's twice the price of a strip procedure, i see a partnership thing perfectly profitable and viable option. and yes dedication to hair restoration from the heart is a key thing here. they say Rome was not built in one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Mr. GQ Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 oh yeah and i'd name my clinic: "HTs from the heart" and then once i'm filthy rich i'd turn it into a hair mill and my Rome empire is back to square one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted April 1, 2009 Author Share Posted April 1, 2009 There is one important correction that needs to be made here with respect to the amount of time the doctor is involved in the FUE process. When performing manual FUE I found that it would take me one hour of exhausting effort to score around 350 graft with anywhere from a 70% to 90% success ratio. With the new tool, however, I can do the same 350 scorings in about 25 minutes (sometimes less)with no appreciable fatigue. Thereafter it's up to the team of technicians to "deliver" the grafts. During the 1,000 graft FUE procedure I perfomed most recently I only worked a grand total of an hour during extractions and perhaps another 25 minutes making the recipient holes. It's not really the amount of TIME that affects the doctors decision to perform FUE. MOST doctors are work-horses by nature, but rather the EFFORT required to obtain a cosmetically signficant number of grafts in a "realistic" time frame. A big factor influencing a doctor's decision to perform FUE is the confidence he has in himself that he will actually be able to perform a quality and worthwhile surgery. With standard manual FUE tools this is not an easy thing to do, but with this motorized tool, and the proper method, success and confidence are much easier to attain- even for a novice. There is no question about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member PLEASE GROW PLEASE Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 I was talking about manual fue and I do believe time and labor is a factor or all strip docs would plant grafts also. If this is all you claim it to be then you sir have helped this field in a gigantic way . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Senior Member Abedogg Posted April 1, 2009 Senior Member Share Posted April 1, 2009 Dr. Feller, Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. Best of luck to you! We really do appreciate the your openness and willingness to share. Abe Had 3k With Umar on Feb 16, 2009 My Hair Loss Website Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Alan Feller Posted April 1, 2009 Author Share Posted April 1, 2009 Here is a picture of a Feller Punch that I posted on this site back in 2004. The same technology that went into the tip of this unique punch is identical to what is used in the new motorized FUE scoring tool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now