Average Donor Availability 15,000 Grafts

[Optimist]

I have been told that a person with average donor hair can have 15,000 grafts harvested using the FUE technique? This is enough to create a full head of hair. Any thoughts?

 

[s.a.f]

Would be f*****g expensive!

 

[RaginDemon]

then no superstars will be bald

 

[Optimist]

I wouldn't count on it.

Looking at a typical bell curve, if 15,000 grafts was the average, one can only assume there must be a number of patients who would have MORE than 15,000 grafts available.

To date, I don't think I've ever seen one hair transplant patient who has received 15,000 grafts.

I would think, if this is the average, then it should be more common.

Falc

Well, I think one reason that it is not more common is that it is recent. Armani says that FUE has opened the door for a much larger number of grafts to be harvested. When you consider that few Doctors do FUE and the ones that do are quite new at it, it shouldn't be a surprise that you don't see this very often. If you check out the bottom of the page via the linke below you will see a person with advanced hairloss who recieved 10,000 FUE. http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/mess ... TARTPAGE=1

 

[Guest]

Once you have seen enough pics and in person observations, you'll know the truth about both FUE's potential AND it's limitations. And Falc is right. First off, to have 15,000 isolated extractions taken from the scalp and still maintain a reasonable post-op donor appearnce, IS THE EXCEPTION, not the rule. C,mon guys, we all know that any Doctor is going to put up the best pics he can. And just about any patient any Doctor showcases is going to be a patient who has outstanding hair characteristecs and of course, superior density. Don't get me wrong though, I am not picking on any docs here, it's just business and promotion at their websites. :whistle:

Listen, I have seen hundreds of FUE pics. My computer crashes on a regular basis even with added memory because of the volume of both strip and FUE patient pics that I continually receive. I can animentally tell you that the average patient with average density COULD NEVER sustain that many extractions from the scalp and not have a compromised donor appearance. And remember, punch size DOES MATTER. Just ask hairtech. He'll tell you that he's seen it first hand just like I have.

I have seen guys that only did 4,000-5,000 FUE grafts from the scalp and looked moth eaten, yet they were told that the method was a "scarless" technique. As with anything else, patients vary. You have to asses each patient independently of his/her own unique characteristics including how well they heal. Some clinics claim that their patients will be able to buzz cut their heads after having FUE. Do they mean EVERYONE? If they do, someone is not telling you the truth. :thumbdown2:

Guys, I am not conveying this based on philosophy or methodology, it's based on what I have seen! FUE does have its benefits and place when taken in perspective to each patients case. Another thing. That number of 15,000 can be misleading because remember, any patient having extensive hairline reconstruction is going to need many, many singles. So enough FUs need to be split down to singles, meaning one extraction can potentially make up 3-4 grafts. IMHO, the assessment should be how many grafts will this patient need, not necessarily how many extractions. We have to evaluate past the surface of the total extraction count if that makes any sense. :agree:

 

[RaginDemon]

Once you have seen enough pics and in person observations, you'll know the truth about both FUE's potential AND it's limitations. And Falc is right. First off, to have 15,000 isolated extractions taken from the scalp and still maintain a reasonable post-op donor appearnce, IS THE EXCEPTION, not the rule. C,mon guys, we all know that any Doctor is going to put up the best pics he can. And just about any patient any Doctor showcases is going to be a patient who has outstanding hair characteristecs and of course, superior density. Don't get me wrong though, I am not picking on any docs here, it's just business and promotion at their websites. :whistle:

Listen, I have seen hundreds of FUE pics. My computer crashes on a regular basis even with added memory because of the volume of both strip and FUE patient pics that I continually receive. I can animentally tell you that the average patient with average density COULD NEVER sustain that many extractions from the scalp and not have a compromised donor appearance. And remember, punch size DOES MATTER. Just ask hairtech. He'll tell you that he's seen it first hand just like I have.

I have seen guys that only did 4,000-5,000 FUE grafts from the scalp and looked moth eaten, yet they were told that the method was a "scarless" technique. As with anything else, patients vary. You have to asses each patient independently of his/her own unique characteristics including how well they heal. Some clinics claim that their patients will be able to buzz cut their heads after having FUE. Do they mean EVERYONE? If they do, someone is not telling you the truth. :thumbdown2:

Guys, I am not conveying this based on philosophy or methodology, it's based on what I have seen! FUE does have its benefits and place when taken in perspective to each patients case. Another thing. That number of 15,000 can be misleading because remember, any patient having extensive hairline reconstruction is going to need many, many singles. So enough FUs need to be split down to singles, meaning one extraction can potentially make up 3-4 grafts. IMHO, the assessment should be how many grafts will this patient need, not necessarily how many extractions. We have to evaluate past the surface of the total extraction count if that makes any sense. :agree:

well said!

 

[Optimist]

You talk about differences in patients, but what about differences in doctors who perform FUE? Surely you don't think that they are all equal. Have you ever seen moth-eaten results from the top docs? You have to take into consideration that doctors have varying techniques and use different size punches for the extraction. I have seen some horrible strip results, but they all came from poor doctors. So, I think it is a logical fallacy to argue that because bad results exist, that any patient risks getting them if they get FUE. You could make the same argument about strip, but I have yet to see a bad strip result from H&W.


Also, as far as splitting grafts, the practice is highly unethical and I would hope no clinics engage in the practice. Armani has said that they do not split grafts and I would be shocked in any of the other top FUE doctors do. But as I pointed out above, it seems that when I talk about FUE, I am referring to the practice of the top doctors, whereas you are lumping all FUE doctors together. Most people on this board are intelligent enough to avoid the butchers and cons and therefore they are really irrelevant to most discussion on here.

 

[Guest]

Falc,

You could not have said that better.

Optimist,

The tops docs do get some bad results now and then as seldom as it may be. You just don't know about it. Great strip docs do get more consistent results because even though strip is more invasive in many cases, if they have competent staff cutting/preparing grafts (yield) and the patient is a good healer. the rest is pretty much based based on the artisitic surgical talent of the doctor. And that is why it is so imperative that each patient has his/her medical history reviewed prior to making any decisions about surgery. There can be other factors that affect the final result. This obvioulsy includes how well they heal from past wounds.

Let me expound and give you an example of a young man in his mid-twenties from New Jersey that contacted me several years ago. He wanted my opinion on this so-called "scarless technique" he heard about. I told him it was not true and that any time a cut is made into flesh, the body heals itself and develops scar tissue in the process. That being said, I also informed him that an identical incision can be made on two different people and the outcome can in fact appear different. One may hardly show anything and the other could stand out. He seemed agitated that I did not simply concur that what he heard was true. He wanted to still buzz cut his head once everything grows out and why the no scarring thing was so important to him.

I did not hear from him until the summer of 2006 and he was extremely upset. He e-mailed me more pics that were 10 months post-op (3600 FUE) and his recipient area looked great. HIS DONOR ZONE DID NOT. WHY?

His first intial pics before surgery showed a very light complexion against dark brown, almost black hair. After surgery, I could in fact see the extraction sites because of the wide contrast between his hair and scalp. He told me that when everything healed, you could see the spots when he buzzed cut his head.

Now in the summer pics, he had attempted to tan the donor area and it made it worse because it made the white dots stand out even more.

There was little to no blood flow in those extraction sites confirmed by the acute whiteness. Some folks heal with more blood flow in the scar tissue, some not. He was the latter. Just that difference was a factor.

In addition, some patients presume that the higher the density level, the less will be noticed in spotting. Not true. In fact the reverse is true for many patients. In his case, he had high donor density and with the added wider contrast. it made the dots more pronounced. With higher density, the naked eye sees more of what is missing.

You can space the extractions further apart but the spotting still showed on him with his 3600 FUE case. He no longer buzz cuts. It's not that he regrets his decision to have FUE, but he feels he was lied to. I asked him if he would consiuder putting up his pics in some of the forums and he said that he would, but he never did.

Does everyone turn out this way? Of course not, but on the same token, don't think that just because some docs have great talent and reputations that it's any guarantee. Consider all of the factors.

 

[Guest]

One other thing. It is not unethical to cut some FUs down to singles IF THAT IS NEEDED to reconstruct a hairline. If the patient has enough single occuring FUs in the strip to complete the hairline, then there is no need to make singles. BUT, if the patient is completely bald in the frontal zone, I'll guarantee you that singles will need to be cut because it takes hundreds and hundreds of single hair grafts to reconstruct. You would not want any multiple hair bearing FUs creating the hairline. :freaked:

 

[Guest]

The numbers do not lie--- nor will they ever lie.

At 30% extraction, the average Joe might be somewhere between 4-6K for fue-----

There is just no reasonable explanation, even if you go to 50% extraction--- you might hit 8-9K

Of course, all of this is based on average density 85 fu's cm/2

Take Care,
Jason

 

[Optimist]

The numbers do not lie--- nor will they ever lie.

At 30% extraction, the average Joe might be somewhere between 4-6K for fue-----

There is just no reasonable explanation, even if you go to 50% extraction--- you might hit 8-9K

Of course, all of this is based on average density 85 fu's cm/2

Take Care,
Jason

How do you the average grafts available for FUE? Have you performed such surgeries? Please explain why your stats are credible.

Doesn't Shapiro still use the archaic strip method? I can't see why you would posture as a FUE expert, but I look forward to finding out.

 

[Optimist]

Falc,

You could not have said that better.

Optimist,

The tops docs do get some bad results now and then as seldom as it may be. You just don't know about it. Great strip docs do get more consistent results because even though strip is more invasive in many cases, if they have competent staff cutting/preparing grafts (yield) and the patient is a good healer. the rest is pretty much based based on the artisitic surgical talent of the doctor. And that is why it is so imperative that each patient has his/her medical history reviewed prior to making any decisions about surgery. There can be other factors that affect the final result. This obvioulsy includes how well they heal from past wounds.

Let me expound and give you an example of a young man in his mid-twenties from New Jersey that contacted me several years ago. He wanted my opinion on this so-called "scarless technique" he heard about. I told him it was not true and that any time a cut is made into flesh, the body heals itself and develops scar tissue in the process. That being said, I also informed him that an identical incision can be made on two different people and the outcome can in fact appear different. One may hardly show anything and the other could stand out. He seemed agitated that I did not simply concur that what he heard was true. He wanted to still buzz cut his head once everything grows out and why the no scarring thing was so important to him.

I did not hear from him until the summer of 2006 and he was extremely upset. He e-mailed me more pics that were 10 months post-op (3600 FUE) and his recipient area looked great. HIS DONOR ZONE DID NOT. WHY?

His first intial pics before surgery showed a very light complexion against dark brown, almost black hair. After surgery, I could in fact see the extraction sites because of the wide contrast between his hair and scalp. He told me that when everything healed, you could see the spots when he buzzed cut his head.

Now in the summer pics, he had attempted to tan the donor area and it made it worse because it made the white dots stand out even more.

There was little to no blood flow in those extraction sites confirmed by the acute whiteness. Some folks heal with more blood flow in the scar tissue, some not. He was the latter. Just that difference was a factor.

In addition, some patients presume that the higher the density level, the less will be noticed in spotting. Not true. In fact the reverse is true for many patients. In his case, he had high donor density and with the added wider contrast. it made the dots more pronounced. With higher density, the naked eye sees more of what is missing.

You can space the extractions further apart but the spotting still showed on him with his 3600 FUE case. He no longer buzz cuts. It's not that he regrets his decision to have FUE, but he feels he was lied to. I asked him if he would consiuder putting up his pics in some of the forums and he said that he would, but he never did.

Does everyone turn out this way? Of course not, but on the same token, don't think that just because some docs have great talent and reputations that it's any guarantee. Consider all of the factors.

I appreciate your input. How long ago did the patient you mentioned have the surgery? If it was several years ago, it may be that he was one of the first patients to undergo a new and unperfected technique.

 

[Guest]

How do you the average grafts available for FUE? Have you performed such surgeries? Please explain why your stats are credible.

Doesn't Shapiro still use the archaic strip method? I can't see why you would posture as a FUE expert, but I look forward to finding out.[/quote]

Ok, well let me break this down for you in the most simple terms that I can.

The AVERAGE Cauc. patient has a donor density of 85 fu's cm/2-- this is generally regarded throughout the hair transplant community as "the norm"-- ask around if you do not believe me.

So, let's do a little math, cool? I am going to deliberately inflate the donor region to 9cm wide and 30cm long.

9 X 30 = 270
270 X 85(fu's cm/2) = 22,950 follicular units----Naturally occuring, of course.

22,950 X 30% = 6885 grafts.
22,950 X 40% = 9180 grafts
22,950 X 50% = 11,475 grafts

Is there 9cm of safe donor zone above the ears? I dunno, perhaps an fue expert can comment? Reps from Dr. ********, Dr. Rose and Dr. Ilter do not believe so. If fact, they do fue everyday and claim to only be able to take 4-6K on most patients.

Ask Hairtech what he thinks--- would he qualify as an fue expert? I think so.

Dr. Feller, Dr. Rose, Dr. Harris, Dr. ********... all believe 25-30% extraction in a given area is the maximum that can be extracted.

I guess I don't have to be an fue expert after all-- maybe just use some common sense.

As far as strip being archaic---- sorry, but that is misinformed. Strip surgery is still a viable option for most balding men looking to maximize their available donor.

With strip, you remove surface area, with fue you do not. Let's not forget that every time we break the skin there is some scarring. In addition, fue can cause subcutaneous scarring that limits the available donor for future sessions.

I do however, believe that younger men who cannot wait until their hairloss stabilizes are candidates for fue, as they may establish a nice hairline and perhaps add some density and still possibly buzz their hair to a #1 or #2, depending on punch size/scarring tendencies.

If you choose to believe that going above 30% extraction is ok, well then that is a philosophical difference of opinion.

So, at the end of the day what have we all found out on this magical journey?

That some common courtesy goes a long way toward helping each other out and making sure good, solid research steers fellow sufferers to top clinics.

Take Care,
Jason

 

[hairtech]

In my opinion...When you take a strip, you close the upper and lower margins, thus in a perfect scenario, the density seems virtually the same.

In my opinion... When you perform FUE you decrease the overall density... in a perfect scenario, it should not be visible, however this becomes an issue when you use larger punches (>1.0mm) and taking larger numbers of hairs per graft and going over the margin percentage of density allowed for that person. (Average is around 25% but it ranges based on density)

That is why I am a proponent of the 0.75mm punch if at all possible, spreading the punches all over the safe zone,(some clinics punch in concentrated areas), and not over harvest past the density % allowed.

I am also a proponent of the strip/FUE combination, meaning strip first followed by FUE... if needed. I think the BSPOT went or is going this route.

 

[Optimist]

Thanks for the responses B Spot and Hairtech.

Armani told me 30,000 grafts are the average and that half of them can be harvested. So, there is clearly a descrepancy between the number you (B Spot) and Armani are giving. I suppose I'll have to continue researching this.

Hairtech,

With strip, you cannot take grafts from the sides of the head right? So doesn't FUE open up a great deal of surface area from which to harvest?

 

[PersonGuy]

With strip, you cannot take grafts from the sides of the head right? So doesn't FUE open up a great deal of surface area from which to harvest?

This has been my question since I've been considering FUE over strip. I have a recession at the temples and am aware that nothing can fill that in better than an hair transplant. I have wondered if FUE hurts the donor area if a person were considering a future strip method after FUE.

Further...any feedback on Dr. Feller in regard to FUE. I'm going for a consultation soon but I'd wondered if anyone here has any thoughts on this particular Doctor.

Thanks.

 

[s.a.f]

With strip, you cannot take grafts from the sides of the head right? So doesn't FUE open up a great deal of surface area from which to harvest?

Of course you can, strips are not just taken in the area at the back between the ears they are usualy done in a smiley shape incorperating the donor above the ears. I've heard of strips as long as 34cm being taken. Strip is not an aichaic method it is a more traditional method since it allows for more work to be done in one session. For guys with higher degrees of hairloss its a more realistic option and the donor area that remains is'nt left thinned out.

 

[CCS]

I bet 15,000 grafts could fill in a NW4 to nw1 very nicely. It would cost at least $80,000 though. You'd no longer have dense sides. Just medium. If you had medium, you'd be thinner on the sides. I think Nizoral keeps my sides nice and thick.

 

[Optimist]

I bet 15,000 grafts could fill in a NW4 to nw1 very nicely. It would cost at least $80,000 though. You'd no longer have dense sides. Just medium. If you had medium, you'd be thinner on the sides. I think Nizoral keeps my sides nice and thick.

Think you could then use HM to fill the sides back in when it comes out?

Also, what do you think about Armani saying things don't look good with HM?

 

[sphlanx2006]

Dr. Armani is a hair tranplant doctor making millions out of it. From what i have heard lately his ethics are also questionable. He is good but he is in it for the money. A good HM would probably mean no more $$ for him. Although it IS possible that HM is not anywhere near yet, i think he just sees the side that is of benefit to him and it is more a "hope" than a scientific statement. After all, unless he has people inside Intercytex and Aderans he knows not much more than you and me.