Equity in grafts between FUT and FUE?

[wookiecrisp]

Hey guys,

I've been browsing the forums for a while now and one thing that I was wondering was if there was actual equivalence in how grafts are counted across the two main procedures of FUT and FUE...and potentially even within the same procedure type.

For example, I read in a different thread long time ago (sorry can't find it) where for older FUT techniques they extracted more hairs per graft so a hypothetical 1000 graft FUT procedure that was done 20 years ago might have the same number of hairs as a 2500 graft procedure done today.  On the flipside for FUE, it seems like there's a higher risk of grafts not growing once transplanted so it seems likely that you will need more FUE grafts to get the same result as FUT surgery with 10-20% fewer grafts.

Am I correct in this understanding?  If so, how should one interpret graft #s when shared by the doctor/other members of the forum?

 

 

[Rafael Manelli]

I have a suspicion the “older FUT technique” where grafts had many more hairs per graft, is minigrafting.

a minigraft is like a minigun. Mini in name only. They’re actually much larger than modern grafts, containing multiple follicular units. Hence less dissection is needed for them, more protective tissue is retained and less transaction occurs, all else being equal they will have marginally higher yield and survival rate than modern FUT.

FUE can produce higher hairs per graft than FUT. This is because surgeons can cherrypick which grafts to use. This can also lead to FUE producing seemingly better yield than FUT, when really it’s just that more hairs were implanted in the same number of grafts. If you watch FUExpert on YouTube, his results are all very dense. They all have a high hairs per graft ratio. 
 

With strip, you just get what you get, and while it takes from what’s usually the thickest area of the donor, it doesn’t allow the same selectivity as FUE.

 

[arthurSam]

This FUT is 6500 hair only 1300 graft with pretty good result: 

 

[Al - Moderator]

18 hours ago, arthurSam said:

This FUT is 6500 hair only 1300 graft with pretty good result: 

 

 

He had large grafts. They are not folicular units. It may look OK in pictures, but it has to be very pluggy if looking at it in person if the most of the hair grew in. He says he had some grafts that contained 10 hairs and 800 grafts that had 5 hairs. This is a very outdated technique. I had 3.75mm grafts done in 1989 and those contained mostly around 5 hairs per graft just like his with some grafts having 3 or 4 and some having a bit more than 5. This is not something you want to have done today.

 

 

 

[arthurSam]

  

1 hour ago, BeHappy said:

 

He had large grafts. They are not folicular units. It may look OK in pictures, but it has to be very pluggy if looking at it in person if the most of the hair grew in. He says he had some grafts that contained 10 hairs and 800 grafts that had 5 hairs. This is a very outdated technique. I had 3.75mm grafts done in 1989 and those contained mostly around 5 hairs per graft just like his with some grafts having 3 or 4 and some having a bit more than 5. This is not something you want to have done today.

 

 

 

 

MFU is not the same technique as the one used in 80th but seems to appears in 2010 so because FUE appear at same time I think only few surgeon done that nowday because it is related to FUT : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_follicular_unit_grafts

The multiple grafts are only used behind the front line and result is very natural:

Quote

Using multiple follicular unit grafts behind the hairline which contain more than one naturally occurring follicular unit bundle, although still controversial,^[6] is becoming more widely accepted because of the proven natural results. Doctors combine micrografts, follicular units, and multi-FU's which results in 2-3 times the hair density of traditional hair transplant procedures. The advantage of this technique is that each graft contains more hair density, the hairs are more likely to be grouped in a natural pattern, the tissue is healthier because it is less likely to be damaged ^[7] during separation and the actual surgery takes less time. The most impressive advantage is that the hair surgery achieves more satisfying results in just a single procedure.

 

Edited February 4, 2023 by arthurSam

[Rafael Manelli]

15 hours ago, arthurSam said:

  

 

MFU is not the same technique as the one used in 80th but seems to appears in 2010 so because FUE appear at same time I think only few surgeon done that nowday because it is related to FUT : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_follicular_unit_grafts

The multiple grafts are only used behind the front line and result is very natural:

 

". Doctors combine micrografts, follicular units, and multi-FU's which results in 2-3 times the hair density of traditional hair transplant procedures." 

Exactly what "traditional procedures" is this referring to? FUT? Old school plugs? 

This Wikipedia article looks like it was written by the marketing team of a minigraft Dr. 

[arthurSam]

5 minutes ago, Rafael Manelli said:

". Doctors combine micrografts, follicular units, and multi-FU's which results in 2-3 times the hair density of traditional hair transplant procedures." 

Exactly what "traditional procedures" is this referring to? FUT? Old school plugs? 

This Wikipedia article looks like it was written by the marketing team of a minigraft Dr. 

Lol