Surgeon not needing to shave recipient area. Normal, or red flag?

[WestCoast251]

I have narrowed my choices down to two surgeons, and aside from price and location, the one major difference is that one of them refuses to do a no-shave recipient area, and the other one is willing to do it (for a slightly increased cost).

My question now is: Are surgeons that can do the no-shave recipient area legit? I'm definitely willing to pay more to not have to shave that area, but I spoke with both surgeons and they will need to add some grafts behind my widow's peak area that already has some hair.

The reason I'm wondering this is that the surgeon who refuses no-shave recipient areas claims that they do it to avoid shock loss. The one who *is* willing not to shave the recipient area says they haven't experienced any correlation between shaving that area and shock loss.

I also double checked with the surgeon who is willing not to shave that area, and he confirmed that the end result would be the same (i.e. they would still insert grafts in areas with existing hair)

So who is right in this situation? Should I be concerned that not shaving that area would A) produce a worse result or B) lead to increased shock loss in that area?

For context: These are two surgeons that are considered "elite" by this forum, names come up all the time, and so either way I think they are otherwise fantastic choices, but the fact that they disagree on this point just gives me pause.

 

The one other (more minor) thing that they differ on is their "target density"... I'm not sure if the standard is grafts per cm^2 or hairs per cm^2. One said they target 40-50, the other says they target 35-45. I assume that wouldn't result in much of a noticeable difference? I've read a lot of reviews of both surgeons, and at least from the pictures it looks like they produce soft, realistic, natural looking hairlines.

[duckling]

It all comes down to one question though that "what is your existing hair density in the areas they will transplant?". If its very less then its easy for them.

some surgeons can do no-shave well. It all depends on their experience doing this type of HT. Some are just not comfortable with it and prefer shaving your head. Currently surgeons are used to shaving head and doing HT. its much faster to create slits when they can see scalp easily and also helps in faster implantation.

In my opinion, they should also inform you that result will be nearly same and sometimes it can be same too but risk is higher. It is going to be inconvenient for them and you too after HT to take care of scalp.

To earn little extra they will offer you no-shave. I will suggest to shave it.

Edited May 31, 2023 by duckling

[DrMunibAhmad]

Shaving or not shaving doesn't influence shockloss. If you implant in a high density in a area where you have thinned native hairs, you will have shockloss of these native hairs anyway. So you'll loose them after 4 weeks. Imo no reason to not shave the area then. 

[consequence]

It's not necessarily a red flag. As with most things in hair restoration surgery, the answer is "it depends".

The no-shave technique is definitely a viable approach in the right hands. If I were to think about it theoretically, it might slow down the pace of graft implantation which wouldn't be good for a larger procedure, but if someone is very fast/experienced or the procedure is quite small this may be less of an issue.

Do they have a track record of patient submitted cases online with their no shave technique?

[WestCoast251]

Yes, and at lest from the phots I’ve seen on this forum, they look great. It’s always just hard to know from an uploaded photo

[Rahal Hair Transplant]

There have always been surgeons who do not require shaving for the recipient area.  That said, I personally believe that shaving enables a surgeon to densly pack follicular units more closely together and is optimal for the overall result.

On the flipside, not shaving the recipient area adds a degree of difficulty for the surgeon/clinic and as a result could potentially compromise the end result.

All that to say, historically, there have always been exceptions to the rule and some surgeons for example we’re still able to produce good quality results even without requiring shaving of the recipient area.  I don’t know if the same surgeons I’m thinking of now require shaving or if they still don’t require shaving.  But I don’t think it was an extra fee associated with their procedure for not shaving.

At the end of the day, to answer your question, not shaving the recipient area is legitimate as in, some surgeons don’t require it. But in my personal opinion, shaving the recipient area makes it easier for the surgeon/clinic and also provides the greatest chance for the best result.

I hope this helps  

Rahal Hair Transplant

 

Edited June 1, 2023 by Rahal Hair Transplant

[consequence]

7 hours ago, WestCoast251 said:

Yes, and at lest from the phots I’ve seen on this forum, they look great. It’s always just hard to know from an uploaded photo

I think then it's best then not to lose the forest from the trees and assume they probably know what they're doing. Ultimately, no matter how good a surgeon is, there's always a roll of the dice and a small leap of faith required as admission price to the operating suite. Remember, though some things are more likely than others, there are no guarantees in surgical hair restoration. Just too many variables.