Input Need FUE 2521-1year post op results

[wazaam]

I would like to get some objective input in regards to my 2521 FUE procedure at 13 months post op.

I personally don't see a big difference in the pre/post op images. I assumed 2521 grafts would have made a much more significant impact specifically to the hairline where they allocated the majority of the grafts?

Please review the attached images and provide your feedback.

 

[wazaam]

Additional Images

immediate post op.

side by side comparison



Before (Left) After (Right) Hairline 6 months post op 2500 FUE

Before (Left) After (right) 1 year post op 2500 grafts

Pre Op Front View

Pre Op Side View

Pre Op Top View

12 days post op top view

12 days post op donor

1 year post op hairline

1 year post op top view

1 year post op top view

 

[FutureFue]

I don't notice a huge difference, but then again your hair was in pretty good shape to begin with, so it is not going to make as profound a difference as putting a bunch of grafts into a completely bald area. Another thing i have observed is that FUE results are often less dramatic than strip. Can I ask how old you are, who the doc was, and what meds (if any) you are currently on?

 

[wazaam]

I am currently 35 years old. I had the procedure done when I was 34.

I took propecia from 22 to 29 but I stopped taking propecia when I was married (30) and have been off propecia for almost 6 years.

Hair Loss Regimen;
Keto 2% 2 X per week
Laser Cap 3 times per week
Tricomin 3 X per week
Vitamin B complex
Zinc
Biotin
Azelaic Acid

As I stated I am just looking for some objective input on my results. I had hoped for a much better outcome given I had a lot of hair to begin with. I am one year post op and I have yet to have anyone say they notice much if any difference including my wife. I assumed 2521 grafts would make much more of an impact based on previous results I have seen posted by patients and clinics.

I think top notch FUE work can produce results consistent with FUT. I have seen many examples of this. I appreciate all the feed back.

 

[SADbutTRUE]

Their is a improvement,your hair looks thicker and healthier,going from a bald front third and regrowth would be a wow result but with having some hair .the result may not look good to some but it is a very good result. go out their and enjoy your new hair.

 

[topccat29]

Looks about right to me. You can €™t expect much of a visual difference in my opinion when you already have that much hair as percentage wise the increase is very, very small. Yes 2500 sounds like a large number but it probably represents close to or less than 10% of your original hair on the top half of your head where most balding patterns can be seen. Put into those terms 10% doesn €™t sound like much so one €™s expectations would probably be less and I suppose with the number 2500 in one €™s head one would have bigger expectations.

A viable graft is a viable graft regardless of if it €™s strip of fue. Yes sometimes strip looks more dramatic as the procedures are usually larger and thicker/darker hairs are often used in the hairline zone as a result of where the donor is harvested. This is not always a good thing especially for those that have so much existing hair in the hairline zone that is so much of a visibly thinner caliber of course all in my own opinion.


Your hair looks good overall and that is the big positive. It €™s possible that maybe you didn €™t need a hair transplant and thankfully you didn €™t experience any shock loss. Looking at it this way one would count their blessings.

 

[nyhairloss]

I am not sure what everyone else is talking about I am hard pressed to know which is before and which is after. Here's an idea: post the same thread somewhere else and ask people to tell YOU which they think is before and after. Easy once you know to say it is fine.

I've seen results from FUE Drs. like Dr. Feriduni, Dr. Diep, Dr. Lorenzo and Dr. Erdogan with 2500 grafts that gave patients with far less in front far better results in front. I'm not sure what the other reply was about '10x as much hair in that area'. As far as I know you can put 30-40+ grafts (or around 60-100 hairs) per sq cm in that front hairline with 2500 grafts. That might be less than a normal head of hair (say 100-200 hairs) but still would be visually significant. Given your existing density I find it hard to understand how your end result is not as impressive as other results that were on patients far worse. Take my advice: repost this and don't label before and after; also find some of the aforementioned doctors with the same # of grafts with patients the same or worse. Sorry for my money (and I know the point should be to make you feel better but I can't in all honesty tell someone that who just went through an invasive operation with months of healing time to do so if there is little to enjoy) the results are negligible and should. not. be.

 

[topccat29]

It's kind of like a glass that is 90% full. You can sit there and pour all day and you are only going to get 10% more in the glass.

Looks like the patient has fine hair and traded some even finer hairs for some that were just fine. Wazzam you appear to have a full head of hair..............and your before picture shows a full head of hair with some hairs in the hairline zone probably minuturizing so you seem to have traded some hairs.

I don't thick you could achieve a super thick hairline zone as you have fine caliber hair. Just my opinion from my observations over the years.

 

[Westcoaster]

Your hair does appear to be thicker in your side by side comparison shots so I would say you have had the growth. 2500 grafts were spread out over the front third to add density to your diffused thinning area which quite possibly has thinned out more since the procedure as I note you stopped taking Propecia 6 years ago. It could be a case of maintaining the density you had with the new grafts, if you continue to lose hair you will need subsequent surgeries. It's hard to notice the changes when you have quite a lot of existing hair already, unlike having a bald or near bald area transplanted into.

 

[Prohairclinic]

Not sure, but I believe many HT surgeons would have second thoughts treating a patient with this many hair pre treatment.
To me it looks like many of the existing hairs fell out, perhaps the infamous shock loss, and where replaced by thicker hairs we see in the pictures.

 

[salvar]

I agree with most of the ones above, definite improvement even though its not like night and day as you see with bald areas, shock loss likely when working in between hairs like you had and often hard to judge the results. hairline could be stronger after the surgery but its not bad at all, your hair looks pretty good and unless you are in the pursuit of perfection I would say you dont need anything more.

The real question is do you still have hair loss? Is there miniaturisation? Even with all the treatment and vitamins you are doing its well possible that DHT is still affecting you, I would get seen by someone that has Proscope or similar microscopic tool to check out the health of your existing non transplanted hair.

 

[Dazzster26]

Hi Friend


You can see a change in density for sure and its a subtle change and to be honest if you think about it if nobody has really noticed you have had work done that's even better in my opinion , has your hair loss stabilized now which is very important have a great night




Dazz

 

[janna]

Hi, Wazaam had surgery at Shapiro Medical with Dr. Ron.

I'd like to post pics taken at our clinic pre-op and use the post-op pictures sent to us by Wazaam.

From what I understand, Wazaam spoke to Matt regarding his results and he said that there was a spot that seemed thin so Matt stated we'd take care of it. This is where the 200-300grafts to take care of the thin spot comes into play.

Wazaam did indeed have plenty of native hairs present prior to surgery. However, when you looked through the hair with magnified loupes, you see the miniaturized hairs through the frontal 1/2. 2500 grafts is a lot of grafts if used only in the hairline, but as you can see in the immediate post op pics, you can see the circled area that was addressed is close to 100 cm2. Dr. Ron did not want to overly thicken the hairline to conserve donor. It's also not prudent to concentrate on the hairline if you see that there is likelihood of more loss, especially when hair loss prevention meds are not taken. Dr. Ron wanted to replace the areas that had miniaturized hairs with stable donor hairs. When 2500 grafts are spread out over the front 1/2, the transformation isn't going to be as great as on someone with no hair. It's really to keep up the look of full head of hair.

 

[Westcoaster]

Looking at the pictures Janna posted it would seem you have lost some native hair after surgery thus it's a subtle change as you now have stronger hairs in the area.

 

[Dr Arvind]

This is a patient I normally would not accept.
Because in my experience no matter how good the growth, he is likely to be dissatisfied as he will not be able to figure out the difference between the native hair lost and the transplanted hair.

He is an ideal candidate for tricopigmentation though.
Regards,
Dr. A

 

[topccat29]

I would have to agree with the clinic you are just basically exchanging some hairs and beefing up the area up a bit which is exactly what I see. The issue has been posted so many times that most should be aware of it. When you plant into existing hair that is weak chances are you are going to lose that hair. So you have a choice lose it now or lose it later and the only other option is to try meds if that appeals to you.

The benefit of having a procedure now is that no one would really know you had anything done.

 

[jackadee]

Hi Wazaam. Your story is the after scenario of a topic I made regarding realistic expectations ...... The thread is located here ...... http://www.hairlossexperiences.com/view_topic.php?id=5948&forum_id=2
I sympathise for the situation you find yourself in but I belive it's no fault of the doctor for the following reasons unless something different was promised at the consultation ....... Obviously I was not there during the consultation process but I'll give my opinion based on the facts I can read here.
If you had not done surgery the miniaturised hair in your recipient area would have died off leaving you with a much thinner look and the need for a certain size surgery to get you back to where you were, this is an almost certainty as you stopped Propecia and the hairs continued to miniaturise ...... What the clinic have provided is a cautious approach, transplanting enough grafts to improve your density and save your donor for the future ...... Sure they could have transplanted more grafts to provide the wow look but let's say you lose a lot more hair several years from now, your sides and crown drop ...... You haven't enough donor to address these area's leaving you with an unnatural look.

If I were in your shoes I would contact the clinic, have an in house evaluation and take it from there ..... I can see an improvement in density, better hairline pictures with the hair lifted up loosely would also help..

 

[Bigmac]

Hi Wazaam, welcome to the forum.
I can definately see a difference in your before and after pictures. Your hair looks thicker for sure. As others have said you may have lost native miniaturised hairs making the transformation less spectacular. To me it would be hard to achieve a spectacular result on someone who had a full head of hair before surgery. There is the possibility some transplanted grafts never grew also, it's hard to say. I think the best course of action is to be evaluated by the clinic as they know where the grafts were placed, they'll be able to check if any areas did suffer less than optimal growth and I'm sure they'll work with you to sort it out.All the best.Bm.