Is It Too Early For A Hair Transplant?

[sunchyme1]

I am starting to realise why FUT is the gold standard, and the best approach. Especially for first time goers.


Strip hrvesting is the best way to utilize, and maximize graft count. Once you reach maximum scalp laxcity to the point where you cannot obtain any more harvests, we will then exert all grafts that are FUE related.


Problem with FUE is the potential to over harvest where as FUT tends to be minimal. Under the right surgeons hands, a nearly undetectable scar will be formed.

With Rahal, I am able to have a low fade, and #2 grade around the scar. Pencil thin line.



I been doing a lot of reading lately, and only now realising why FUT is all around the best way to go, especially for young people like myself.


If you look at a lot of work done by most FUE surgeons, 2/3 of the grafts on average are taken out of non-permanent zones. Which is okay if you are not likely to go over a NW4, but those on the advanced scale are in trouble.


When we look at the FUE extract zones, it can be seen as high risk, low risk, high risk. FUT grafts are all harvested in ONE region, and ONE scar (low risk)

Notice how Rahal took my FUE from the safe zone, and didn't spread it all over my entire head? it's impossible to get more then 1.5-2k out of this zone with out over harvesting and looking like a moth ate the back of the head. FUE is good for people with low, moderate hair loss. For those on the advance scale they will be taking a risk aggressively taking grafts.. After that they won't be good FUT candidates.


I am how ever going to go through with this FUE procedure, but am planning on going through with 1.5-2k grafts. Less graft exertion, and more surgeries in the long leaves me at minimizing donor wastage, and being able to still exert FUT grafts. I am a NW5.

mate is that you?

what are you getting done this time round? i can see your crown is a bit thin here. you getting some work done on that?

also you make some good points on fue vs fut.

 

[JeanLucBB]

I am starting to realise why FUT is the gold standard, and the best approach. Especially for first time goers.


Strip hrvesting is the best way to utilize, and maximize graft count. Once you reach maximum scalp laxcity to the point where you cannot obtain any more harvests, we will then exert all grafts that are FUE related.


Problem with FUE is the potential to over harvest where as FUT tends to be minimal. Under the right surgeons hands, a nearly undetectable scar will be formed.

With Rahal, I am able to have a low fade, and #2 grade around the scar. Pencil thin line.



I been doing a lot of reading lately, and only now realising why FUT is all around the best way to go, especially for young people like myself.


If you look at a lot of work done by most FUE surgeons, 2/3 of the grafts on average are taken out of non-permanent zones. Which is okay if you are not likely to go over a NW4, but those on the advanced scale are in trouble.


When we look at the FUE extract zones, it can be seen as high risk, low risk, high risk. FUT grafts are all harvested in ONE region, and ONE scar (low risk)

Notice how Rahal took my FUE from the safe zone, and didn't spread it all over my entire head? it's impossible to get more then 1.5-2k out of this zone with out over harvesting and looking like a moth ate the back of the head. FUE is good for people with low, moderate hair loss. For those on the advance scale they will be taking a risk aggressively taking grafts.. After that they won't be good FUT candidates.


I am how ever going to go through with this FUE procedure, but am planning on going through with 1.5-2k grafts. Less graft exertion, and more surgeries in the long leaves me at minimizing donor wastage, and being able to still exert FUT grafts. I am a NW5.

For people with 8000 grafts in their donor area they have more than enough to cover their entire head with a beautiful hairline. Erdogan is getting graft survival rates of 95-98%. Why would I risk a scar for 2% more? Even the best surgeons like Rahal leave a scar noticeable to me.

"2/3 of the grafts on average are taken out of non-permanent zones." That's literally just a lie. It's rare with a good surgeon that ANY are taken from non-permanent zones, as there are computational techniques to analyse for thinning. If you want to be pedantic, ALL hair on the donor area thins over time at about 1% per year after 25.

 

[shookwun]

First of all most people dont have anywhere near FUE 8000 grafts. Fred was confirmed to have around 4000 without over harvesting. (staying within a general safe extraction zone)


Be lucky to have 5k in total without risk of over harvesting

Would look like a moth ate the back of your head. there is no such thing as Scarless survey.

When you shave down you will look like someone with thousands of dot punches all over the head. I would say 4k grafts is safe, but anything over and it may be noticeable.

The only safe zone is where my grafts were taken. Anything above and below are considered higher risk areas. This obviously poses a problem for anyone who's destined to be a Norwood 6-7

Wake up. All you are seeing is polished work and not 95% of the cases where someone's donor area looks like it was eaten by a moth.

Erdogan posts people with good donors. you dont see the sh*t donors, and people with average-below.

For people with 8000 grafts in their donor area they have more than enough to cover their entire head with a beautiful hairline. Erdogan is getting graft survival rates of 95-98%. Why would I risk a scar for 2% more? Even the best surgeons like Rahal leave a scar noticeable to me.

"2/3 of the grafts on average are taken out of non-permanent zones." That's literally just a lie. It's rare with a good surgeon that ANY are taken from non-permanent zones, as there are computational techniques to analyse for thinning. If you want to be pedantic, ALL hair on the donor area thins over time at about 1% per year after 25.

 

[shookwun]

The harsh truth is that right after my FUE (2000 grafts), De Reys looked at my donor and said: "I think you have 1500 grafts left". His wife (who also planted some of my grafts) nodded in agreement.

Ah well, I just hope I can cover that monk bald spot at the back of my head.

My donor really looks untouched so I don't think overharvesting will be a problem.

I want at least 2500-3000 grafts for what's going to be my very last hair transplant.

These people actually think they are walking around with 8k FUE donors.


Your doctor is giving you a realistic idea, and quote about what can be harvested unlike these hacks that double grafts counts to make more money while putting you at risk.


This is the only safe zone area for extracting grafts. Anything below, and above depending on final pattern is at higher risk for telogen & DHT related loss over time. Gratft numbers go up depending on final norwood pattern. A NW5 compared to a NW7 final pattern makes a huge difference on grafts that can be extracted

[/IMG]

Surgeon skill must be taken into consideration, but we should not be naive and think we have more then we actually have. To many variables behind a successful surgery.

As you said Fred (Advanced balding) 3.5-4k grafts without over harvesting, and putting you in a risk area.

I would say most people on average have 5k FUE grafts without high risk.


This poor fella was over harvested from a 4k FUE surgery.

Should of went for a maximum of 2.5-3k at one time.

 

[JeanLucBB]

These people actually think they are walking around with 8k FUE donors.


Your doctor is giving you a realistic idea, and quote about what can be harvested unlike these hacks that double grafts counts to make more money while putting you at risk.


This is the only safe zone area for extracting grafts. Anything below, and above depending on final pattern is at higher risk for telogen & DHT related loss over time. Gratft numbers go up depending on final norwood pattern. A NW5 compared to a NW7 final pattern makes a huge difference on grafts that can be extracted

[/IMG]

Surgeon skill must be taken into consideration, but we should not be naive and think we have more then we actually have. To many variables behind a successful surgery.

As you said Fred (Advanced balding) 3.5-4k grafts without over harvesting, and putting you in a risk area.

I would say most people on average have 5k FUE grafts without high risk.


This poor fella was over harvested from a 4k FUE surgery.

Should of went for a maximum of 2.5-3k at one time.

Most people aren't headed to norwood 7 as their final stage of hairloss though. There are means by which this can be checked.

 

[shookwun]

Most people aren't headed to norwood 7 as their final stage of hairloss though. There are means by which this can be checked.

I mentioned how NW5-7 makes a huge difference on donor availability on the sides, and back portion of the head.


Most people who are early balders can expect to be NW5 into old age. And if they dont experience this, then there entire head slowly erodes.

Which is why young bald are typically bad candidates. even if we maintain with drugs, decades of diffusing will rekd your entire scalp which further needs more grafts. To assume one surgery enough is delusional. Almost guaranteed to need 2+ surgeries. Expect to spend around 20,000CAD on surgeries as a average figure.


Even if you are not heading towards a NW7, you would be lucky to have 6k extracted at the back of your head without looking like a moth starting chewing it all over.

Erdogan and all these after shots are polished, and a typicall highlight of there base cases. Most these people they post also have extremely good donors.

How often do you see people having 5000+ FUE.

Not often, all though we can nitpick and find the average person who has has a couple surgeries for this outcome.

judging by your current hair, i would say that you have never had surgery before. Hair looks like it's forming a NW5a pattern.