How does Dr. Wesley's Scarless Pilofocus work?

[Zao]

Spencer brought FUE to the U.S and Europe which changed the hair transplant industry forever and if he is getting behind this, then this is a huge innovation. There is no question about it.

I don't think it would even matter if he brought Wesley and Gho together, since I have a feeling that Spencer sees much more potential with this technique. He has been talking about Gho on TBT since I've been listening and he has never spoken with the same kind of confidence that he did about Woods' FUE and now Wesley's new technique. This is a big deal!

[534623]

Such a device could drastically improve the survival rates and yield of FUE procedures.

Indeed, this point is also mentioned in the patent - but you will be surprised when a read on which (old) principles the improvement is based (read below)...

So the questions I have are:

1. How labour intensive/seamless is the extraction process? Is there any chance that the instrumentation could increase the number of grafts that can be extracted by FUE in a session?

It appears that all this just depends on how fast the user is able to move the devices (endoscope including all the other attached devices) beneath the patient's skin as well as depending on the follicle structrue beneath a patient's skin which varies from patient to patient. And NO - you can't "increase" a certain follicle number for extractions within a given ("safe") donor area. This point is also mentioned in the patent. That means, everything is basically the same as with traditional FUE - the difference is only that you extract the follicles from beneath the skin instead of from above the skin's surface. So you can't "increase" a certain number of follicles you have.

2. At some point, the instrument has to penetrate the skin. In addition, if I understand things correctly, the instrument has to be able to traverse under the skin. What type of trauma/scarring will this cause?

This is snippet from the patent:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[0013]
Without cutting or altering the overlying skin surface, the design described herein enables a precisely-controlled extraction/harvest of desired tissue that accounts for the borders of the desired tissue, the angle and direction of the tissue (e.g. hair follicle) as it is positioned beneath the skin surface, and the depth of penetration of the desired tissue all while effectively avoiding inclusion of undesirable surrounding tissue in the harvest or injuring vital vessels or nerve plexes in the process.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
THAT is the claim I highly doubt ...

3. Spencer had eluded to possible donor regeneration. This is the most exciting part to me.

"Donor regeneration" can't happen with this technique, because the main focus of this technique is:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[0011] The technique described herein allows for:

1) the isolation of an intact hair follicle with maximal tissue (both dermal and subcutaneous) surrounding the stem cell-containing portion of the follicle without traumatizing the overlying skin surface;

[0192] … Further, for hair follicle harvesting for subsequent transplantation, the system can described herein can include a larger amount of vital tissue structure around the hair follicle during extraction, which will enhance follicle viability and survival.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

According to these patent claims, a main focus of this technique is also to remove MAXIMAL TISSUE around the hair follicles, to enhance follicle viability and survival. In simple words - to get rather very "chubby" FUT grafts and NOT extremely "skinny" (HST) grafts.

[Ted]

Edit..............

[Dees Dab]

O.K. trying to guess how can the donor regenerate. If Dr Nigam can perfect his doubling technique invitro with safety, can they insert one fu in donor under the skin or must they make a slit on the skin like traditinal FUE, I quess that would require shaving the donor?

One advantage is almost no failed/transected extractions in the harvesting process.

[Follicle Death Row]

I think if you followed a hair restoration plan using Pilofocus for the bulk of the job (say conservatively popping 6000 on top, maybe more) and then looked into Cooley's plucking then you could top up some density potentially and have a really nice non scarring result.

Spencer seems very positive about Pilofocus. Also in Cooley's presentation, it did look like his plucking technique was having some efficacy (at least to my eyes anyway) with the key there being that the plucked hair has to be placed beside healthy terminal DHT resistant hair.

Might be an interesting combo for the maximum result.

[Artista]

Spencer brought FUE to the U.S and Europe which changed the hair transplant industry forever and if he is getting behind this, then this is a huge innovation. There is no question about it.

I don't think it would even matter if he brought Wesley and Gho together, since I have a feeling that Spencer sees much more potential with this technique. He has been talking about Gho on TBT since I've been listening and he has never spoken with the same kind of confidence that he did about Woods' FUE and now Wesley's new technique. This is a big deal!

Excuse me Zao but Spencer DID NOT 'bring FUE to the US/Europe' he merely REPORTED it to all of us.
Of course Spencer had expressed how impressed he was with FUE and he was roundly CRITICIZED for it too.
FUE eventually DID turn out to be as innovative as Spencer viewed it to be. Keep in mind, regardless to what the 'haters have said in the past, Spencer has ALWAYS BEEN RESPECTFULLY OBJECTIVE in his reporting here at BTT/TBT.
So for him to express his genuine excitement for Dr Wesley's new approach as he has done for FUE surgery goes a long way.

[Zao]

Excuse me Zao but Spencer DID NOT 'bring FUE to the US/Europe' he merely REPORTED it to all of us.
Of course Spencer had expressed how impressed he was with FUE and he was roundly CRITICIZED for it too.
FUE eventually DID turn out to be as innovative as Spencer viewed it to be. Keep in mind, regardless to what the 'haters have said in the past, Spencer has ALWAYS BEEN RESPECTFULLY OBJECTIVE in his reporting here at BTT/TBT.
So for him to express his genuine excitement for Dr Wesley's new approach as he has done for FUE surgery goes a long way.

Actually Artista, Spencer did much more than "merely" report about FUE. I've been listing to TBT since the late 90s. I remember a show when Dr. Feller discussed how Kobren not only introduced U.S. doctors to it but described Woods' FUE to him and several other doctors including Dr. Cole because Dr. Woods would not share it with them.
They would not have experimented with it if Spencer didn't push it and shed light on it. I think Spencer deserves much more credit than just saying he reported on it.

[Artista]

Zao, My main point is this - "...regardless to what the 'haters have said in the past, Spencer has ALWAYS BEEN RESPECTFULLY OBJECTIVE in his reporting here at BTT/TBT.
So for him to express his genuine excitement for Dr Wesley's new approach as he has done for FUE surgery goes a long way."

[Shan]

Spencer is the man!!!

[Zao]

Zao, My main point is this - "...regardless to what the 'haters have said in the past, Spencer has ALWAYS BEEN RESPECTFULLY OBJECTIVE in his reporting here at BTT/TBT.
So for him to express his genuine excitement for Dr Wesley's new approach as he has done for FUE surgery goes a long way."

I agree Artista, but I think if people understood the real history of the hair transplants and Spencer's integral role in all of the advancements he would't have any "haters" When I first started listening most doctors were not even doing FUT. They were doing plugs and mini grafts and Spencer single handedly changed that so that everyone did FUT. I remember another show when Dr. Feller said that too and so did Dr. Bernstein (my doctor).

I'm a super fan because of how he changed my life and I have followed him ever since. I believe that we would still be seeing most doctors doing mini and micro grafts and no FUE if it was not for Spencer Kobren and Dr. Gho and Dr. Wesley would have never started doing FUE if Spencer didn't make it a priority for everyone to learn, that's the truth. So his haters are just ignorant and should really be thanking him. If I were Spencer I would have said **** you to these jerks a long time ago, but he just keeps helping all of us. He is a great man and I think he deserves credit where credit is due. I don't know where I would be if I hadn't found him and that is the truth.

[JJJJrS]

And NO - you can't "increase" a certain follicle number for extractions within a given ("safe") donor area. This point is also mentioned in the patent. That means, everything is basically the same as with traditional FUE - the difference is only that you extract the follicles from beneath the skin instead of from above the skin's surface. So you can't "increase" a certain number of follicles you have.

I think you can be a little more liberal working outside the safe area if there's no scarring. But I didn't mean increasing the safe donor area, which can only really be done with donor regeneration, but rather increasing the number of grafts for an average FUE session.

For example, if you reduce the scarring and trauma and if the instruments simplify the extraction process, then there is a possibility you can extract more grafts per session than a standard FUE procedure, which is typically limited due to labour and trauma.

Spencer brought FUE to the U.S and Europe which changed the hair transplant industry forever and if he is getting behind this, then this is a huge innovation. There is no question about it.

I don't think it would even matter if he brought Wesley and Gho together, since I have a feeling that Spencer sees much more potential with this technique. He has been talking about Gho on TBT since I've been listening and he has never spoken with the same kind of confidence that he did about Woods' FUE and now Wesley's new technique. This is a big deal!

As great as a scarless procedure and unblinding the FUE extraction process is, donor regeneration is still the "holy grail" of hair transplants. There's no mention of donor regeneration in the patent but Spencer has mentioned this possibility on his show.

I respect Dr. Wesley's work. Anybody trying to move this slow industry forward deserves praise. But if you can theoretically tailor his instrument to include some donor regeneration as well, then you have a huge game changer and the best of both worlds.

[Zao]

As great as a scarless procedure and unblinding the FUE extraction process is, donor regeneration is still the "holy grail" of hair transplants. There's no mention of donor regeneration in the patent but Spencer has mentioned this possibility on his show.

I respect Dr. Wesley's work. Anybody trying to move this slow industry forward deserves praise. But if you can theoretically tailor his instrument to include some donor regeneration as well, then you have a huge game changer and the best of both worlds.

This is a patent for an instrument, why would it include anything about regeneration? When you file a patent you file it in the broadest terms possible. If Spencer says that there is a theoretical possibility that there can be regeneration, I'm sure he knows something that we don't and that is not included in the patent.

If he's betting on Wesley, there is good reason and I would trust his instincts over anything else.

[534623]

I think you can be a little more liberal working outside the safe area if there's no scarring.

Of course, you can do this - as you can do this with normal FUE also. But exactly there is the problem:

You can do this - if you're fully aware about that you can also end up once upon a time ....

http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpost.php?p=104000&postcount=52

... like the guys in the pic.
You will lose all these hairs also, if transplanted, in the recipient area.

For example, if you reduce the scarring and trauma and if the instruments simplify the extraction process, then there is a possibility you can extract more grafts per session than a standard FUE procedure, which is typically limited due to labour and trauma.

Nope. Why should Dr. Wesley's technique be lesser labour and trauma intensive? I can't find not even 1 reason why and how this could happen.

Concerning "trauma" and "scarring":
So everything just happens beneath the skin - contrary to normal FUE.
And contrary to FUE everything what remains (should remain) intact, is just the the very thin (in comparison) stratum corneum layer - the most superficial layer of the epidermis. In simple words, the only (very thin) reason, why you will not see anything at the skin's surface thereafter. That's the only (very thin) argument contrary to normal FUE ...

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[0095] ... In endoscopic surgical hair restoration, or piloscopy, individual intact hair follicles or follicular units are removed with minimal or no disruption of the stratum corneum 210 by an endoscopic device inserted beneath the scalp.

[0096] Referring to FIG. 2, a cross-section of a hair follicle 202 shows the native tissue surrounding a hair follicle 202. Spanning three separate layers of the skin--an epidermis 204, a dermis 206, and a fat-containing, subcutaneous layer 208--the follicle 202 protrudes through the skin surface at the most superficial layer of the epidermis 204, the stratum corneum 210. The intact hair follicle 202 includes the components that enable self-renewal of the follicle after it is transplanted into viable autologous tissue.
The two critical regions in which stem cells abound are

- a bulge region 212 located near an erector pilli muscle 226 and
- a follicular bulb 214 which contains a dermal papilla 216.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

All that means, that, of course, exactly the same happens in the skin, as with normal FUE. The only difference, concerning "removal of tissue" is that with Wesley's technique the very thin (in comparison) stratum corneum layer remains completely intact - you know, the most superficial layer of the skin which you can touch with your fingers.
Everything below this thin (keratinized) layer will be removed as with normal FUE. And as soon as lots of tissue is removed in the skin, this gap/hole or whatever you call it in the skin after removal of the grafts, will be REPLACED - with what exactly?
With air? Milk? Honey? Water? Right - SCAR TISSUE (fibrous tissue) - sorry, what else ...

[Joker]

Now that the cat's out of the bag, I really wish Dr. Wesley or Spencer would get in here with some facts.

At this point, I tend to agree with Iron Man that Dr. Wesley's procedure is going to produce A LOT more trauma than FUE (even if it is not visible). I also can't see how any of this could even theoretically lead to donor regeneration, although I really hope Dr. Wesley has some plans in place to try and get follicles to regrow.

There HAS to be some information we are lacking.

[Artista]

Hey there members, At this present time Dr Wesley has NOT presented his findings nor has he shared any of his photographic proof relating specifically to his 'Scar-less' technique. He WILL be doing that soon.
Speculation is normal but dont make any decisions on the outcomes until Dr Wesley HIMSELF provides ALL of the information.
Im not stating that anyone here is wrong in their assessments BUT none of us are 100&#37; educated on all of the facts as yet.
Lets be fair-minded about this. Negative connotations may be viewed as facts by others and that is not fair.