It's OFFICIAL!! H&W Technique Validated by Japanese Study

[Jotronic]

For the past ten years Hasson & Wong have been performing their lateral slit technique which we have claimed gives a more natural appearance to the transplanted hairs.

 

In the May 2006 edition of the Journal of Dermatologic Surgery a Japanese study entitled Orientation of Multi-Hair Follicular Units in Nonbald Men: Perpendicular Versus Parallel (Kuniyoshi Yagyu MD, Koki Hayashi MD, Stephen Chang MD) proved that the natural orientation of multi-hair follicular units is perpendicular to the direction of hair growth. The study was based on information accumulated from the study of 100 patients. This has been the principle behind the H&W Lateral Slit Technique. The placement of multi-hair follicular unit grafts into lateral slits will recreate this pattern seen in nature.

 

At last our technique which has been dismissed by others has been validated by something seen very rarely in the hair transplant world- a STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT STUDY.

 

Told you guys we were ahead of the game

[Jotronic]

For the past ten years Hasson & Wong have been performing their lateral slit technique which we have claimed gives a more natural appearance to the transplanted hairs.

 

In the May 2006 edition of the Journal of Dermatologic Surgery a Japanese study entitled Orientation of Multi-Hair Follicular Units in Nonbald Men: Perpendicular Versus Parallel (Kuniyoshi Yagyu MD, Koki Hayashi MD, Stephen Chang MD) proved that the natural orientation of multi-hair follicular units is perpendicular to the direction of hair growth. The study was based on information accumulated from the study of 100 patients. This has been the principle behind the H&W Lateral Slit Technique. The placement of multi-hair follicular unit grafts into lateral slits will recreate this pattern seen in nature.

 

At last our technique which has been dismissed by others has been validated by something seen very rarely in the hair transplant world- a STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT STUDY.

 

Told you guys we were ahead of the game

[JakeVig]

Hi Jotronic,

 

that sounds great but I dont think that the lateral technique is the best to use all the time. Let me explain, I have recently (i.e. yesterday had my HT with Ron Shapiro from SMG - will be posting my experience on another thread). I asked him if he was going to use the lateral slit technique, he said that he uses a variable number of techniques based on the patient and recipient area, whatever gives the most natural look and best illusion of density. Basically he approaches every patient individually and makes up his mind at the time what would look best. Im not sure if this is also standard practice or not but he also uses varying needles as low as .6mm - to .9mm depending on if he is putting in 1's, 2's, 3's or 4's grafts.

[Alexander]

Any good doctor does the following: Matches the angle of the transplanted hair as closely as possible to the angle of the existing hairs, or as closely as possible to the way the hair naturally would grow on a patient. If this is lateral slit, then so be it. H&W are not the only doctors in the world doing that.

[UGLY MAN 4 LIFE]

Originally posted by Alexander:

Any good doctor does the following: Matches the angle of the transplanted hair as closely as possible to the angle of the existing hairs, or as closely as possible to the way the hair naturally would grow on a patient. If this is lateral slit, then so be it. H&W are not the only doctors in the world doing that.

 

They may as well be, because I've seen no one come close to their work in terms of consistency and density.

[troy]

well whatever they have been doing is great , the results ive seen are amazing. Thats not to say they are the only talented group with consistant results.

[UGLY MAN 4 LIFE]

Show me another clinic that works on high level NW's and brings the bad candidates back to total coverage and the good candidates to a non-balding look. Every clinic should be able to work on the small cases, there's nothing special in that at all.

 

Give credit where credit is due. H&W were the originators of the lateral slit technique, and everyone followed. Results talk and b.s. walks, there's no point in discussing the technicalities of what we don't understand, the best we can do is look at the end product, and the end product is head and shoulders above the rest at this particular clinic relative to all the clinics I've seen on this site and others.

[JakeVig]

Originally posted by UGLY MAN 4 LIFE:

Show me another clinic that works on high level NW's and brings the bad candidates back to total coverage and the good candidates to a non-balding look. Every clinic should be able to work on the small cases, there's nothing special in that at all.

 

Give credit where credit is due. H&W were the originators of the lateral slit technique, and everyone followed. Results talk and b.s. walks, there's no point in discussing the technicalities of what we don't understand, the best we can do is look at the end product, and the end product is head and shoulders above the rest at this particular clinic relative to all the clinics I've seen on this site and others.

 

Without a doubt H&W results are amazing from a coverage and results point of view with what can be achieved with 1 HT - the results clearly speak for themselves. I think there is 2 points being made here, 1 being that the lateral technique seems to provide H&W the ability to perform mega sessions. The other being what would provide the most optimal naturalness and illusion of density where maybe a number of different slit techniques would provide an optimal result. The only reason why I suggest this is that Ron Shapiro used a number of techniques I didn't even know existed! And having seen the before and after photos in terms of naturalness I believe the results are truly undetectable.

 

I believe all results from H&W and SMG are excellent so I guess its just a comparison between excellent and most excellent In the end only the results matter.

[Alexander]

Yes H&W get results. But let's make sure we realize why they get the results. It's not becaue of the lateral slit technique...It's becaue they figured out a way to extract larger numbers of grafts from patients. If the lateral slit technique is inherently superior, then they wouldn't need to use as many grafts to achieve a look of coverage, right? But they use more grafts than anyone else to get the results they do, so just keep that in mind. And there is no such thing as total coverage, there isn't enough donor hair to achieve such a thing.

[the B spot]

The Lateral Slit is the ONLY way to achieve a dense natural hairline, coupled with the artistic skill of the surgeon. The results cannot even be questioned, IMO. This is my opinion for the frontal third, and perhaps some of the whorl in the crown, in order to maximize angulation. In the mid-scalp region, I believe it is possible to use sagittal incisions with 2 or 3 hair grafts in order to maximize density, using a minimum amount of grafts. Of course, one could split all of the threes into 1 and 2 hair grafts and use the lateral slit technique, but that is up to the surgeon. I think this creates a dense "Bar" of hair that can be extended into the frontal region or into the crown using the lateral slit technique. This can be accomplished with fewer grafts and possibly leave more for frontal or crown work. IMO, the lateral slit is MOST important in the frontal zone, the hairline itself (a must), and GOING INTO NATIVE HAIR. When many of you mention H&W or Ron Shapiro, and you cannot put your finger on why their work looks "right", that is the reason. Each of these surgeons go into existing hair better than anyone else, period. My personal favorite is Dr. Shapiro, but it is a toss up at this point when viewing results. Now, we can discuss whether or not to treat patients from middle-out or front to back, but that is a preference used by the surgeon, and subsequently the patient who chooses the surgeon, but in any case the lateral slit is the ingredient necessary to achieve the results we demand now for hairline restoration. I personally go and look a Joe's site whenever I want to feel good about making the decision to get a HT, and what I want to look like in the future. I think I have 5000 grafts left, and I plan to use them all to get where I need to go. Thanks Joe!

[Pat - Community Publisher]

In my opinion hair transplantation has gone through an important evolution in the past few years from standard follicular unit grafting to the new "Gold Standard" of today - Ultra Refined Follicular Unit Hair Transplantation.

 

This evolution has been so significant in raising the bar for excellence that it required setting new and higher standards for recognizing which physicians/clinics had risen to the challenge of developing the capability of providing very large sessions of ultra refined and dense hair transplantation. Those physicians who rose to the challenge of meeting these higher standards were invited to join the Coalition of Independent Hair Restoration Physicians.

 

In my opinion, Hasson and Wong contributed much to this upward evolution from standard follicular unit grafting to today's Ultra Refined Follicular Unit grafting.

 

An important part of H & W's contribution was the careful attention to the orientation and angle of the transplanted grafts (i.e. the lateral/perpendicular orientation of the grafts).

 

But an even more important contribution in my opinion has been the move toward smaller incisions that enable dense packing and the increasing the size of sessions.

 

Thus while a clinic performing standard follicular unit grafting may do a 1,500 graft session on a class 4 patient - a cutting edge clinic providing Ultra Refined Follicular Unit grafting could provide this same patient (assuming average donor density/elasticity) with perhaps 3,500 plus follicular unit grafts of a sufficient density to make the surgery a "one pass" session.

 

While both "follicular unit" sessions may ultimately give the patient a great result, the ultra refined and very large mega session enables the patient to get there faster in fewer surgeries. Therefore patients who are candidates for large high density sessions deserve and need to know which clinics have developed the capability to provide such sessions.

 

All members of the Coalition have developed the capability to provide such larger and ultra refined sessions. However, Coalition member physicians do differ regarding the importance and value of placing grafts in a lateral/perpendicular orientation or in a saggital parallel orientation.

 

For example, Hasson and Wong place all grafts laterally, while Dr. Jeff Epstein places all grafts saggitaly. Dr. Shapiro likes to vary the orientation depending on the area the grafts are being place into.

 

I tend to believe that placing multi hair follicular unit grafts (especially 3 and 4 hair grafts) in a lateral/perpendicular orientation can potentially provide an increased appearance of fullness since the hairs will tend to fan out on the surface of the scalp. However, for one and two hair grafts I don't think this issue matters much.

[UGLY MAN 4 LIFE]

Originally posted by Alexander:

Yes H&W get results. But let's make sure we realize why they get the results. It's not becaue of the lateral slit technique...It's becaue they figured out a way to extract larger numbers of grafts from patients. If the lateral slit technique is inherently superior, then they wouldn't need to use as many grafts to achieve a look of coverage, right? But they use more grafts than anyone else to get the results they do, so just keep that in mind. And there is no such thing as total coverage, there isn't enough donor hair to achieve such a thing.

 

You're doing the patient a *diservice* by under quoting him on his total available donour and limiting your procedure sizes. There's nothing comparable about their results with other pictures on the forum. You can look at the 7000 graft cases, particularly the cases where the hairs were dense packed mostly in the frontal third. Looks the same/similar as cases with a smaller graft count right? Sure they do! In photos! Take it outside, add some wind and sun and that's where the numbers count. You can't fool nature from every angle in daylight. Numbers count as much as placement technique.