- Reaction score
- 556
.
I agree, FUT would have a better yield. The only downside is you lose grafts that are dormant.
Little.
Lol.
Yep, studies have shown that FUE has a 94% graft survival while FUT has around 98%.
So it's totally justified to get a big *** joker scar at the back of your head that's preventing you from ever shaving your head.
Gotta get those 4% man!
70% yield? In 2004 maybe, the technique has evolved ans has be perfected you know.
Skilled surgeons have very low transection rates.
The scar is a big deal. No option to shave your head anymore. Mandatory George Costanza look.
I had FUE and I can look at the picture that was taken right after implantation and the hair I have on my head now, and I really can't see one missing graft.
The gap between FUT yield and FUE yield has become insignificant with a top surgeon. 1 to 5% max.
There is no justification to have FUT in 2017.
As the popular saying goes: anyone who gets FUT nowadays is a certified bozo.
No it isn't.
Good luck seeing even 1 mm scars from a social distance.
No one would ever notice.
FUT results posted online are much more impressive then Robotic FUE. Im going to have to go with FUT. If only some folks could turn back time. Worst feeling is to chase repairs.