View Full Version : NeoGraft Hair Transplant – A Physician’s Perspective
07-29-2010, 07:23 PM
Spencer Kobren speaks with NeoGraft hair transplant surgeon, and patient Dr. Ken Williams about the concerns many in the field share about Neograft’s controversial marketing of its automated FUE hair transplant machine.Watch The Two Part Interview BelowPart 1 Part 2 Post from: Hair Loss Show: The Bald Truth
Dr. Glenn Charles
08-05-2010, 08:29 PM
It was nice to hear an honest opinion/perspective about the Neograft automated device. As with most new technology, this machine also has its negatives. I believe that there are other new automated FUE devices that can lead to similar results. The experience of the person operating the device is still the key factor.
08-09-2010, 03:47 PM
The travelling technician portion of this interview was very interesting.
There is a reason every state requires a license to practice medicine and surgery. If you get caught doing so without a valid license, you get to defend yourself to your last penny for several years before getting thrown in jail. A miserable prospect I am sure.
To date, the number of technicians playing the role of unlicensed “travelling professional” have been very small and as such have not gained any notice by state licensing boards or district attorny offices. Should any organization actually be wreckless enough to actually promote a service that is not performed by a licensed physician, it won’t be long until a district attorny brings criminal charges.
In my state of New York, a technician may NOT cut skin. That is considered to be surgery, and it doesn’t matter if the actual doctor is in the other room, the same room, or joined at the hip.
As for the Neograft machine, it has significant limitations that I’ve already discussed in great detail, not to metion a huge price tag. It would be cheaper and easier just to perform proper FUE and or strip.
I am a practicing physician of FUE and strip surgery and have invented several HT instruments including those for FUE. I have sold all my FUE companies and have no current commercial interest in FUE manufacture. The opinions I express are as a knowledgabel and experienced HT doctor and patient.
Dr. Alan Feller
08-12-2010, 10:04 PM
I believe that the demonstration at the ISHRS Live Surgery Workshop dispelled that the NeoGraft device "has its negatives." Dr. Bauman in his interview with Spencer Kobren talks about the "misconceptions that went on for a year" when NeoGraft was first introduced, by doctors who had never used the NeoGraft device. These doctors made false, distorted and totally inaccurate claims about the NeoGraft device, without, as I have said ever having used the device. This was hardly responsible, scientific reporting by a group of supposedly scientific professional doctors. At the Live Surgery Workshop in Orlando last April, 2010, NeoGraft had the lowest transection rate of any other tool and the grafts, which were extracted at the show, were examined under the microscope by many of the doctors at the show, who can attest that the grafts were robust, moist, and of excellent quality.
I have taken several comments from Dr. Bauman's interview with Spencer Kobren to further dispell the false negatives that were wrongly written about the NeoGraft device and which many doctors still seem to incorrectly think is true. Spencer Kobren mentions that Dr. Bauman thinks the NeoGraft is "cutting edge and that in Dr. Bauman’s practice he is “seeing phenomenal results. “ Dr. Bauman, who is experienced with the NeoGraft device states: " NeoGraft is an incredible asset to my practice as it has helped the patient. .. We were doing “FUE without NeoGraft for 7-8 years and it was tough, we struggled with the manual instruments and it was difficult to get the number and quality of grafts. NeoGraft has changed this. NeoGraft has been great for the patients.”
Dr. Bauman continues the interview by stating: "“We demonstrated NeoGraft for the first time at the Orlando live surgery workshop and the room was standing room only and these guys [doctors] were amazed NeoGraft lived up to the hype. " NeoGraft is an enormous breakthrough and changing the industry... I am optimistic NeoGraft will continue to change the industry …it will set the industry forward. " "So many patients out there do not want to be cut with a scalpel , do not want stitches or staples in the head, they want to get to the gymn in three days and play tennis." "NeoGraft lets us do it quicker, easier, more efficiently, we get beautiful grafts from NeoGraft , they grow beautifully." " NeoGraft is the only FDA approved device for extraction of hair follicles. Kevin Nalts and Greg Benson [who are two patients that had a hair transplant done live on the internet by Dr. Bauman] are growing [their hair] like gangbusters!!" "They are happy and getting great results, it’s working." Dr. Bauman states on the interview that he is "a happy camper with it [NeoGraft machine] and it has transformed my practice for the betterment of our patients. He finishes by stating: "And that is the key , our patients want this and they love it !!"
08-13-2010, 12:29 AM
I cannot agree with your comment that “to date, the number of technicians playing the role of unlicensed “travelling professional” have been very small…” It is an established fact that all hair transplant doctors use technicians. There are agencies set up to send technicians to the doctors. I hesitate to say majority, so I will say a large percent of hair transplant doctors that do the STRIP surgery only do a small part of the surgery, leaving the rest to technicians. Technicians are extremely important in the hair transplant industry. The doctor in a STRIP surgery usually gives the anesthetic, and cuts out the strip of scalp to be used for the graft transplant. These procedures take less than 20 minutes. The most time consuming part of the hair transplant procedure is when the doctor makes the slits, which depending on how many follicles could take an hour or more. Meanwhile, the rest of the hours, which could be from 4 – 8 hours, depending on the size of the transplant are taken up by the technicians, often 2-5 technician or more. The technicians dissect the removed piece of scalp into follicles. Technicians often implant the follicles into the slits. Often a doctor will be involved with the implanting part of process, but there are those who feel it should all be done by the doctor. A great many of these technicians who work in offices where the STRIP method is used are “travelling technicians” who come to assist the doctor. Why is it relevant whether the technicians travel to assist the doctor or work in the doctor’s office permanently. Most of the time doctors use both their own technical assistants and hire “travelling techs” when they need extra help. This is how the hair restoration industry works. The same technicians who travel to doctors to assist in STRIP surgery also travel to doctors who do FUE surgery with or without NeoGraft in order to assist them. The only difference between the two technician groups is that the group that goes to the NeoGraft doctors have been trained on the NeoGraft device, in addition to being able to do work for STRIP hair restoration doctors.
You also state “Should any organization actually be wreckless enough to actually promote a service that is not performed by a licensed physician, it won’t be long until a district attorney brings criminal charges.” I assume you are referring here to the FUE procedure. This is a very interesting statement that could be open to another interpretation if you will follow my reasoning. Let us look at the Strip method. Just because a piece of scalp has been removed from the body in a STRIP hair transplant procedure, does not mean that technicians are the legally appropriate personnel to “cut” that scalp. Can you think of any other procedure where organs or body parts are removed from the main live body, whereby the same body part is going to be reconnected to the body and it is technicians that are doing cutting or altering of those parts? I cannot. For example if one loses an arm that can be reattached, but the arm needs surgical work done before reattachment do you think a technician would do this work?
The scalp is still a living viable part of the body, which is being cut up/altered by technicians who have never formally been designated to do so by any regulatory body. The small parts the scalp was cut up into (follicles) are going to be reattached. The truth is that the only reason techs do this work is because no one has legally challenged the work techs do in a STRIP procedure. Their role is unusual when compared to similar procedures using different body parts and skin parts that may be transferred from one part of the body to another. This has been pointed out to me by medical legal advisors. Many procedures become acceptable in society because they have been done for a long time and built up a history. Still I would not bring this to the attention of any attorney general.
As for your comment that “In my state of New York, a technician may NOT cut skin”, this is not accurate either. There are minimally trained technicians called phlebotomy techs that draw blood, paramedics can “give shots, cut into a patient, or otherwise puncture the surface of the skin.” Physician assistants can also do many invasive surgical procedures. The NeoGraft trained FUE technician, goes to the hair transplant doctors to assist them, as they do for the STRIP doctor. It is expected that any doctor, whether FUE or STRIP will follow the laws of the State he practices in and so will the technician. As I stated, whether the technicians travel to the doctor or not is of no consequence as long as they are competent.
As for your comment that the NeoGraft machine “has significant limitations that I’ve already discussed in great detail,” I cannot understand why you persist in continuing your campaign about the NeoGraft device, when the NeoGraft machine has been observed by so many doctors in live hair transplant demonstrations, including the ISHRS Live Workshop in Orlando last month, where there was standing room only and where only positive comments were given about NeoGraft. The Neograft device had the lowest transaction rate possible at that show and produced viable, robust, moist and excellent grafts that were examined under microscope by many of the ISHRS doctors, who noted well formed grafts and excellent implants.
If you read my prior post to Dr. Charles you will learn that your comment that” the Neograft machine, …has significant limitations” is a comment that has no truth to it, and that your notions about the NeoGraft device are leftover notions from a time when doctors were waging a smear campaign to dissuade patients from using the NeoGraft, maybe because those doctors were worried NeoGraft will change the industry, which I personally believe it will. There is a history of doctors resisting change, just as they did with Laparoscopy, claiming this procedure would kill people, and with corrective eye surgery. You statement has no bearing on the real facts about how well the NeoGraft machine does FUE procedures. I will repeat here the same quotes I used in my post to Dr. Charles which come from the interview Spencer Kobren did with Dr. Bauman, who uses the NeoGraft machine in his practice. This interview took place about a month ago. Dr. Bauman states in the interview: “It [NeoGraft machine] has lived up to the hype. NeoGraft is an enormous breakthrough and it is changing the industry. I am optimistic…. NeoGraft will continue to change the industry.” He goes on to say “We get beautiful grafts from the Neograft, they grow beautifully. NeoGraft is the only FDA approved device.” He also states we are “following Kevin Nalts and Greg Benson, [two famous hair transplant patients who had their procedure done live on the internet] and their hair is growing like Gangbusters!!” Bauman ends by saying “ I am a happy camper and it [NeoGraft] has transformed my practice for the betterment of our patients and that’s the key. Our patients want this and they love it. “ There are similar testimonials from many of the doctors who have bought the NeoGraft machine to date. Negative comments have not been shown historically to prevent the spread of a good medical device. It is a futile exercise.
Dr. Glenn Charles
08-13-2010, 06:15 AM
Hudson are you working for Dr. Bauman or Neograft? Just wondering, because it sounds like you think that the Neograft machine is the greatest think since sliced bread and that everything Dr. Bauman said in his interview with Spencer is absolute.
08-14-2010, 01:21 PM
While I think Spencer Kobren is being open-minded about the Neograft, I also sense some healthy skepticism. Of course Dr. Bauman is going to say the Neograft is a enormous breakthrough, he uses it and saying that promotes and defends its use. Personally if Spencer Kobren is skeptical, then I’m skeptical too. I think we all should be.
11-05-2010, 04:45 PM
I'm 28 and have been losing my hair since about the age of 22, I'd say i'm at a 3 or so. I have pretty thick hair (White guy if that counts) What are my best options? I usally fade my hair and have it cut short on top. I like the FUE from what i saw. Around how much am i looking at to get a procedure done? In live in Northern Cal.
10-20-2012, 05:23 PM
I was wondering if anyone has had this procedure done recently, using the search function on this forum I didn't see anyone who actually had this performed posting results.
There is a clinic close to where I'm located, its an interesting method of transportation, but I would like to learn more before jumping to any conclusions.
10-21-2012, 06:03 PM
I found this You Tube video that demonstrates the operation of the device here:
Is the controversy related to techs rather than doctors doing hair transplants?
It's not like the device comes with an artificially intelligent robot from the future to guide the extraction of grafts. Appears to me like this device, as with any other tool in the wrong hands could create a disaster result. There is little room for error extracting grafts. Isn't transection rate dependent upon the hands guiding any quality device?
I am skeptical of premature over-automation. For example, I recently read an article stating that California approved automated driverless cars on the road. Like technology never fails and computers never crash.
Does this device drill the grafts and snip the bottom, then suck the cut graft into a holding chamber?
10-21-2012, 07:26 PM
There is a large clinic in Phoenix who has been using this device for a few years now, one of these days I'm going to drive to the clinic and see what I can learn. I live in Scottsdale, its only a few miles from my house
The cost is considerably less than the traditional method of FUE extraction and transplanting, but I would want to speak directly to past clients before I made any decisions to try this route.
After finding a few threads on this forum about the Neograft system, I read there was a lot of hoop-la about the device and procedure methods by a few doctors who post here stating the device causes damage to follicles, I'm not sure if anyone has made any determination whether this is true or false, I haven't read anything on the internet from people claiming they were maimed in any fashion, or their procedure failed miserably.