FUT VS FUE

[somya]

Guys lets have a discussion about pros and cons of FUT and FUE. I do prefer FUR bcos of below mentioned reasons any idea about its limitations except cost?

 

reasons to choose FUE

 

--------------------------------------------------------Strip or FUT--------------------FUE

Pain after the procedure--------------------------------Minor-------------------------None

Percent of time the doctor operates on the client------10-30%------------------------80-90%

Stitches required---------------------------------------Yes---------------------------No

Extensive bleeding during or after the procedure-------May occur---------------------No

Wearing hairstyle short in the donor area--------------Not possible------------------Possible

Natural results-----------------------------------------Possibly----------------------Yes

Nerve damage, numbness, permanent pain-----------------Possibly----------------------No

Healing Time: donor area--------------------------------Months------------------------Aprox.7days

Healing Time: recipient area----------------------------Approx. 14 days---------------10-14 days

Transection rate (grafts damaged during extraction)----Varies 10-60%-----------------5-10%

Recovery time needed before exercise is possible-------1-2 months--------------------1 -2 week

Amount of time after which client may return to work---1-4 weeks-----------1 day after The strip

[Ventuoguy]

That's a bit of an oversimplificaton. I would disagree with the transection rate as a starter.

[Maxxy]

Yeah, I'd disgree with the majority of that actually.

[Stingray]

I too would disagree with virtually all of the original post.

 

Healing time recipient area - 14 days? Not likely

 

Natural results: Strip = possibly and FUE = yes? WTF. That doesn't even make sense.

 

Also the OP left out a couple of biggies like how many grafts can be transplanted in a single sitting and cost.

 

Don't get me wrong. I like FUE but the above post is misleading and should be ignored in my opinion.

[Forrest Gump]

Somya, not only is your post somewhat misleading, it contains several critical errors. For example, the transection rate patterns are the reverse of what you posted. That is, there is higher probability of graft damage with FUE than FUT.

 

Also, FUE might be fine for small procedures, but if you need 2000+ grafts, you have to choose FUT over FUE.

[hair_me_out]

I have to disagree as well. Cost isn't included, are you serious?

[Bill - Seemiller]

Somya,

 

I posted the below on another thread, but since it applies here, I thought I'd offer my input.

 

In my opinion, FUE has its place, but will never be a replacement for FUT via strip.

 

As I see it, here are the benefits and drawbacks of FUT verses FUE in a nutshell. Understand however, that surgical hair restoration should be considered permanent. Thus, planning for the long term is crucial.

 

Benefits of FUT

 

1. More available donor hair supply on average

 

2. More consistent than FUE on average: While FUE in some patients will yield as much growth as FUT, in others, there is much greater transection due to the additional forces placed on the follicle during extraction and lack of supporting tissue surrounding the follicle. A patient's physiology and hair characteristics may exacerbate these risks.

 

3. More cost effective than FUE on average

 

Drawbacks of FUT

 

1. Linear strip scar: though typically minimal with today's advanced closure techniques (aka trichophytic with a double layer closure), there are risks of scar stretching

 

2. Slower donor healing time

 

3. Other risks associated with FUT related to the donor, exacerbated if closed under too much tension.

 

Benefits of FUE

 

1. No linear scar: Scarring with FUE has a greater possibility of being unseen at shorter hair lengths.

 

2. Faster healing time

 

Drawbacks of FUT

 

1. Fewer candidates for this procedure due to the below listed drawbacks.

 

2. Less Available Donor Hair: makes this procedure an impossibility for patients with advanced hair loss, unless used in combination with strip to maximize the available donor hair supply.

 

3. Less consistent than strip: While FUE in some patients will yield as much growth as FUT, in others, there is much greater transection due to the additional forces placed on the follicle during extraction and lack of supporting tissue surrounding the follicle. A patient's physiology and hair characteristics may exacerbate these risks.

 

4. Typically more expensive than strip

 

A combination of the above techniques can be employed to help patients maximize their domor supply and achieve the best results. See more on Maximizing Hair Counts Via FUT and FUE.

 

I hope this helps.

 

Bill

[scar5]

I've had at least 7 strips and 4 fues. Here is my input. 46 yrs old, first at 24

 

If you are happy with yourself (I wasn't, or didn't think I would be so I got an HT) and have a high self-esteem and have done all the research, I think strip might work out for you, because when things go sour, as you age and your donor this, as your minaturized hair that supported and dissolved the HT hair melts away, you will happy to accept it and let things be and let that horse shoe do it's thing, to cover you donor scar. Having done research, you know that the scar gets more obvious as you age, not less, because the hair thins at the back too. If you can't take the horse shoe now, you might not later on, you just might well be bitter not having any option. I swear to you I never imagined wanting to buzz or shave but now that option matters much, much more than the transection figures, or cost issues you guys quibble about.

 

P.S. If you wanna know why I don't post doc details, you can see my posts on other sites and get an idea of why once you are 'aligned' you are aligned.

[wb280]

hi scar! wow 7 + 4, thats a lot of procedures u have gone thru mate!

 

just curious, when u mentioned that the hair at the back thins while we age, but the donor area is typically a stretch under your ear.. and i think that area should be quite resistant to MPB. also after a decade or so after the last procedure, i supposed the scar is really really undetectable? And even if the non-transplanted hair fall off with age, i guess the hair at the back should be quite strong ( below the earline ) and unless u are buzzing entirely down to the skin, i think it shld be fine since a couple cm of hair length should more or less cover the scar

 

anyone care to shed some light on this issue?

[EpilepticSceptic]

Well, what does 7 strips and 4 fue surgeries tell you about "scar5" ? REPAIR PATIENT! He's 46 and had his first surgery at age 24. Do the math. That means his 1st strip HT was in 1987. At that time, even with the very best doctor, the field was so primitive that EVERYONE who underwent HT surgery was butchered by today's standards. I know to many repair patients reading this it may sound harsh, but the unblemished truth is that pretty much ALL patients who got HTs in the 80s and 90s were lab rats who helped advance the field to where it is today. Just like any other field of medicine or science, it takes thousands upon thousands of experiments with different techniques to finally arrive at something extraordinary. Even strip closure techniques have radically advanced in just 5 short years; so I would definitely assume that scar5's donor scars must be less than optimal, if not downright terrible. I don't mean any offense to you scar5, but a donor area with 7 strips taken out is definitely going to look "thinned out" whether one thins with age or not. I feel for you man, but you just cannot claim that your outcome will be inevitable for a virgin scalp with today's infinitely superior techniques.

 

Originally posted by wb280:

hi scar! wow 7 + 4, thats a lot of procedures u have gone thru mate!

 

just curious, when u mentioned that the hair at the back thins while we age, but the donor area is typically a stretch under your ear.. and i think that area should be quite resistant to MPB. also after a decade or so after the last procedure, i supposed the scar is really really undetectable? And even if the non-transplanted hair fall off with age, i guess the hair at the back should be quite strong ( below the earline ) and unless u are buzzing entirely down to the skin, i think it shld be fine since a couple cm of hair length should more or less cover the scar

 

anyone care to shed some light on this issue?

[EpilepticSceptic]

Concerning the OP's post:

 

I have been obsessively researching HTs for over 5 years now, though I am still a virgin scalp. From all that I have learned I could probably teach a course on it now to a college class -- ya know, HT 101 !!!

Way back in 2005 on the HLH forum there were MANY newbies taking the FUE plunge and arguing that it was the NEW, SUPERIOR technique and that within a few years strip would be completely obselete. Yet, where was the PROOF ? I thought back then pretty seriously about going to Dr. Cole's (who at that time was considered in the top 3 docs worldwide on that site), and I actually did visit his office for a consultation. I wanted to meet some patients in person, but there basically were NONE !!! HUGE red flag #1 !!!!. There was one guy working at the office who had the FUE (FIT as Cole calls it)and his results looked ridiculous to me. He supposedly had over 3000 grafts, but it looked like he had maybe 500 to me; and he even told me personally that his first FUE surgery was a failure and the grafts did not grow. In my opinion he was a LAB RAT for FUE.

Now, just search the HT boards on the net and look under "repair". You will find MANY disillusioned and unhappy FUE patients, most of whom will be the ones who had extensive balding and needed 4000+ grafts. One surgeon in particular (Armani) who advertised "FUE Megasessions" has an overwhelming # of patients who got their donors ravaged and got little or no growth. Again, where is the PROOF ?? The only proof I see after 5 years of watching all the FUE lab rats go under the knife is that, for patients needing alot of grafts with extensive balding, FUE is a VERY risky procedure indeed!! Feller is probably the only surgeon out there who can really handle it (at $10 per graft), and even he will tell you that it is no replacement for strip by a long shot. If you're a good HT cantidate with extensive balding (NW4 or higher), then if you really want your locks back it's my well informed opinion that strip is far superior for most. And the strip/FUE combo seems to be the best of the best at fully maximizing your donor!!

[scar5]

Labrat, that's fine with me. No offence taken I can see your passion about this. But let me say for the record, my last strip was 16 months ago (trico exc doc), first 1988 and by far and away my best strip result came in 1995, by the very same doc that gave me my worst strip scar in 1988! Go figure! I tell you one thing that hasn't changed man. Back in 88 I was told thatHT had gone through an amazing transformation in the past five years (and it had) - the very same thing you stress now. Another thing I think punters should know is that that Dr. Feller's take on FUE is NOT the definitive one, many docs are doing it well. I think getting think hair fast, strip is the cheap effective way, but in the long run complications with the hair style can come into the pic. Best of luck to you.

[EpilepticSceptic]

I hear ya bro! We're all in this together.

 

Concerning docs who are doing excellent FUE: I look forward to the day when ANY of them have a website that posts HD videos with a plethora of patients successful outcomes, with that comb parting the hair in multiple locations on the scalp and clearly defined close-up angles for all to see. I think we know who is the only clinic that has such a website as of now, and they only do strip. Results speak volumes!

 

I do look forward to that day, but I'm afraid I just can't wait until I'm 50 years old to make a move on this -- and I'm 40 now !!

 

And I just cannot easily forget all the Armani Megasession FUE cheerleaders on the HLH forum back in the old days of yore (2005). With the way they were talking about it back then you would have thought strip surgery was an outdated method that only unethical, money fiend butcher docs were still performing. Lo and behold, look who turned out to be the REAL butcher all these years later !!!!!!!!!! Some of those Armani FUE stories sound like concentration camp experiments to me!

 

Originally posted by scar5:

Labrat, that's fine with me. No offence taken I can see your passion about this. But let me say for the record, my last strip was 16 months ago (trico exc doc), first 1988 and by far and away my best strip result came in 1995, by the very same doc that gave me my worst strip scar in 1988! Go figure! I tell you one thing that hasn't changed man. Back in 88 I was told thatHT had gone through an amazing transformation in the past five years (and it had) - the very same thing you stress now. Another thing I think punters should know is that that Dr. Feller's take on FUE is NOT the definitive one, many docs are doing it well. I think getting think hair fast, strip is the cheap effective way, but in the long run complications with the hair style can come into the pic. Best of luck to you.

[windjc]

Originally posted by labrat69:

I hear ya bro! We're all in this together.

 

Concerning docs who are doing excellent FUE: I look forward to the day when ANY of them have a website that posts HD videos with a plethora of patients successful outcomes, with that comb parting the hair in multiple locations on the scalp and clearly defined close-up angles for all to see. I think we know who is the only clinic that has such a website as of now, and they only do strip. Results speak volumes!

 

I do look forward to that day, but I'm afraid I just can't wait until I'm 50 years old to make a move on this -- and I'm 40 now !!

 

And I just cannot easily forget all the Armani Megasession FUE cheerleaders on the HLH forum back in the old days of yore (2005). With the way they were talking about it back then you would have thought strip surgery was an outdated method that only unethical, money fiend butcher docs were still performing. Lo and behold, look who turned out to be the REAL butcher all these years later !!!!!!!!!! Some of those Armani FUE stories sound like concentration camp experiments to me!

 

Originally posted by scar5:

Labrat, that's fine with me. No offence taken I can see your passion about this. But let me say for the record, my last strip was 16 months ago (trico exc doc), first 1988 and by far and away my best strip result came in 1995, by the very same doc that gave me my worst strip scar in 1988! Go figure! I tell you one thing that hasn't changed man. Back in 88 I was told thatHT had gone through an amazing transformation in the past five years (and it had) - the very same thing you stress now. Another thing I think punters should know is that that Dr. Feller's take on FUE is NOT the definitive one, many docs are doing it well. I think getting think hair fast, strip is the cheap effective way, but in the long run complications with the hair style can come into the pic. Best of luck to you.

 

You make some really good points labrat69. I mentioned this recently on a seperate thread, but so much of what people argue about on these forums comes down to Quality Control. Or how consistently a doctor gets the same results over and over. There is more evidence of quality control with the top strip surgeons than the top FUE surgeons.

 

However, that doesn't mean a person can't get an equally great FUE result. It just may mean the odds are riskier.

 

The hair transplant field will continue to evolve - there is too much money involved for it not to.

 

You are choosing strip. From your posts it seems like that is the best choice for you.

 

I chose FUE. I am in the entertainment industry and needed a soft hairline and a fill in of both temples, so I went with the riskier (one with less quality control) technique.

 

If the time comes for a 2nd surgery, I'll decide based on what I need which way to go. If I need massive coverage and the FUE is still not great for this, then I have no problem going strip on my second procedure. If FUE evolves or if I just need some touch up down the road, then maybe I'll do FUE again.

 

The right HT is such a personalized thing. That's why I wish more posters like yourself spoke passionately and HONESTLY about all he things to consider.

[Balboa]

those statments in the original post are soooo wrong i cant understand where he got that info