ACell, a Current Review of Applications in Hair Transplant Surgery

[SilverSurfer]

cvazbar,

The stupidity and irony in your question shines through. Why don't you read more, learn some more and then participate in these forums. Otherwise, bug off. Don't waste Dr Cole's and the rest of the forum's valuable time when he can be answering good questions.

[CVAZBAR]

somehow the tone of your posts suggest you already know the answer to that question. not sure what the big fuss is about. it's just what he prefers to call his procedure. let him call it however the hell it deems fit.

i'm more curious about what he's going to name the 'auto-cloning' procedure if it actually works haha.

What fuss? It was a simple question. KeepHoping asked Dr Cole if he was willing to do a HT with his CIT method on him, so I figured I ask what that is. Why are you so defensive? Is he your daddy haha?

[Havok]

That's exactly what I was thinking. It basically seems to be the same as FUE, but why the name change? I would like Dr Cole to explain the difference, if any.

somehow the tone of your posts suggest you already know the answer to that question. not sure what the big fuss is about. it's just what he prefers to call his procedure. let him call it however the hell it deems fit.

i'm more curious about what he's going to name the 'auto-cloning' procedure if it actually works haha.

[CVAZBAR]

That's exactly what I was thinking. It basically seems to be the same as FUE, but why the name change? I would like Dr Cole to explain the difference, if any.

[HairTalk]

lol i don't think most people know what FUE means anyway. if they do then they probably know there's very little difference between the two. regardless, i doubt people seek out dr. cole because of the way he named his method.

While "most people" almost certainly do not know what "F.U.E." is, I'd wager the vast majority of persons seriously contemplating undergoing a hair transplant are precisely aware of the technique, as well as of that of strip-harvesting. Sorry, but Dr. Cole's marketing of "C.I.T." really just seems geared at differentiating the procedure from F.U.E., when, in fact (as far as I can tell), "C.I.T." IS what just about every other doctor in the field calls "F.U.E."

[Havok]

As far as I can tell, "C.I.T." is just a marketing-gimmick: a proprietary title for the standard F.U.E. technique used by many surgeons, which can make it sound like something unique in the field and thus worth paying more for.

lol i don't think most people know what FUE means anyway. if they do then they probably know there's very little difference between the two. regardless, i doubt people seek out dr. cole because of the way he named his method.

[HairTalk]

I had no idea what CIT was and I did some research but I'm still confused. What's the difference with CIT from FUE? And if CIT doesn't leave visible scars, why doesn't every doctor do this? Can someone inform me more on this. I'm really considering a HT but the scar has me thinking twice. How are the results and yield from CIT?

As far as I can tell, "C.I.T." is just a marketing-gimmick: a proprietary title for the standard F.U.E. technique used by many surgeons, which can make it sound like something unique in the field and thus worth paying more for.

[SilverSurfer]

54%

Dr Cole,

I agree with KeepHoping's question, any idea on how to make that 54% to increase?

[CVAZBAR]

I had no idea what CIT was and I did some research but I'm still confused. What's the difference with CIT from FUE? And if CIT doesn't leave visible scars, why doesn't every doctor do this? Can someone inform me more on this. I'm really considering a HT but the scar has me thinking twice. How are the results and yield from CIT?

[Havok]

is there any other hair restoration doctor who can confirm whether dr. cooley's plucked hair is in fact mostly intact hair follicle? so if i pull my hair out with my bare hand and examine it under a microscope, i wouldn't see that translucent bulb around the root of the hair? i become depressed every time dr.cole makes his case.

[KeepHoping]

Dr. Cole,

I'm a 23 year old, and I've asked you before but I'd love to try again, I'm diffusely thinning in what seems to be a NW5 progression with the persistance of a frontal hairline at around a NW2, hasn't receded too much fortunately. I know grafting into hair would be risky but would you be willing to try and rebuild my temples and strengthen the hairline which would take the risk of shock loss out, use your CIT method with Acell and I'd be willing to take hair tattoos on my donor and have it rechecked for regrowth by you and your technicians at a later designated date. Would this be something you would be willing to try out?

Also, 54% regrowth is pretty good, do you have any ideas on how you could get get a higher rate of regrowth at this point?

[HairTalk]

A standard plucked hair contains very little tissue as Dr. Cooley noted back in 2006. it will grow back. What Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are doing today is plucking mostly intact follicles or intact follicles (the WHOLE ORGAN as you put it).

But, Dr. Cole, by Dr. Cooley's own account (found on page #30 of this thread):

I agree with [wolvie1985] completely. Hair grows back after plucking. I have no special, secret, magical plucking technique. I got better at plucking hairs with adequate epithelial cells attached to the shaft. No one has seen any thinning or lack of regrowth in the areas I've plucked. Nor would I expect them to, because I am not extracting complete follicles.
[...]

Dr Cooley

[SilverSurfer]

Dr Cole

Dr. Cole,
Very interesting posts. Just one question, when you say you have seen up to 54% regrowth it means not all of your patients have had these results. What would you say is the average amount of regrowth on patients treated with ACell in their donnor areas? Also, are you expecting these numbers to go up anytime soon?

[John P. Cole, MD]

Anyone can get as upset about this all they want, but it is not going to change the facts.

Let me quote Dr. Cooley from 2006.

"March/April 2006, Volume 16, Number 2, p. 39 Co-Editor's Message Jerry E. Cooley, MD

I was born and raised in Missouri, the "Show Me State." The origins of this nickname are obscure but the most common explanation is that it was coined, or at least popularized, in 1899 by a U.S. Congressman from Missouri named Willard Duncan Vandiver. Vandiver, a scholar, writer, and lecturer was speaking at a meeting in Philadelphia and was questioning the accuracy of an earlier speaker's remarks. Vandiver declared, "I come from a state that raises corn and cotton and ****leburs and frothy eloquence neither convinces nor satisfies me. I am from Missouri. You have got to show me." Missourians were known as nononsense country folk who demanded proof before accepting something as true.

The "show me" attitude is not necessarily rude or confrontational. In our professional lives, we are frequently presented with claims about new techniques and the results certain surgeons are able to achieve. There is absolutely nothing wrong, and in fact it is our duty, to politely request proof for such claims. Some, however, seem confused about the distinction between "tell me" and "show me." Telling others about your new technique is the first step, but this should be followed by presenting credible evidence.

When Dr. Gary Hitzig began claiming several years ago that he was "auto-cloning" beard hairs, I was naturally skeptical. So I flew up to New York and asked him to "show me." With a flick of his wrist, he plucked a bunch of beard whiskers from a patient using his special needle holder. When I looked at his grafts under the microscope, I was surprised to see that many (not all) were in fact intact hair follicles! I had truly been shown, and there was no doubt in my mind that intact beard follicles could be plucked and transplanted to the scalp where they would grow. Textbooks typically describe plucked scalp hair as having only some adherent epithelial cells from the outer root sheath. To my knowledge, there has never been reports of being able to pluck intact follicles. Time to revise the textbooks!

The concept of donor dominance has been a well-accepted principle in our specialty for 50 years. Along comes Dr. Tommy Hwang who claimed that the recipient site had an important influence on grafted hair. His initial results were published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, and in this issue he shares his long-term results. He provides compelling proof that the recipient site determines graft survival and subsequent growth rate while hair caliber remains similar to hair from the donor site. In my mind, he has convinced me that our new understanding should be of "donor dominance/recipient site influence." Now we need research to understand exactly how the recipient site affects graft survival and growth rate. Is it merely a function of blood flow? Some of those doing body hair transplants have claimed that chest hair grafted to the scalp will grow longer like scalp hair, but we need more convincing evidence of this. It would certainly add more support to this emerging concept.
Jerry Cooley, MD"

Now the fact that he is describing this whole situation differently 3 to 4 years later does not change the facts. A standard plucked hair contains very little tissue as Dr. Cooley noted back in 2006. it will grow back. What Dr. Cooley and Dr. Hitzig are doing today is plucking mostly intact follicles or intact follicles (the WHOLE ORGAN as you put it).

If they apply acell to the plucked area, they might see more regrowth. i still don't know how you study it because there is no way to determine if the hair you plucked is the same follicle that grows on the top and the donor area because all follicles look the same. With body hair, you can totally remove an area through FUE and then go back 6 months later and it is full of hair. it is thinner, but there is plenty of hair. The reason is that there are many hair in the exogen phase on the body.

I've seen up to 54% regrowth in my FUE extraction sites by putting Acell in them. Yes, I am essentially plucking intact follicles and i'm getting regrowth. This is why i suggest that Dr. C and Dr. H apply acell to their donor area where they pluck hair. I still want to know what the yield is with these plucked hairs and what the hair diameters are. If the yield of plucked hair is lower than with transplantation, then i would say in general that plucking is not an efficient means of restoring one's hair.

[KeepHoping]

Dr. Cole

Any news on seeing regrowth from your CIT procedure with the implementation of acell Dr. Cole?