PiloFocus: Dr. Carlos Wesley

[joachim]

We are. Dr Wesley is running clinical trials soon for it.

but only for the pilofocus technique, right?

i mean, we should find a way to do it with standard FUE, as well, if Dr. Cole could see some regeneration already.

[FearTheLoss]

but only for the pilofocus technique, right?

i mean, we should find a way to do it with standard FUE, as well, if Dr. Cole could see some regeneration already.

I believe it is physically impossible with standard fue...i believe it is a combination of transecting the follicle perfectly along with keeping the acell where it should be. this is why spencer talks about the approach being one that would allow for the regeneration

[baldymcgee]

Also, artista has seen the presentation none of us were allowed to see and he said no doubt it will have regeneration, it's just uncertain how high or low of a percentage we will see consistently.

Speaking of Artista, wasn't he supposed to get a test Pilofocus session sometime this spring or summer? Did that ever happen?

[hellouser]

Speaking of Artista, wasn't he supposed to get a test Pilofocus session sometime this spring or summer? Did that ever happen?

LOL, I'm willing to put down all my life's savings betting that it got delayed.

[HairTalk]

although i think that pilofocus is indeed a cool approach and a nice addition to the current FUE methods, i'm on the other hand not really impressed. there's probably not going to be any regeneration at all (why should it? based on what theory? ACell only?).
i had so much hope in pilofocus last year because it was SO EXTREMELY hyped up by artista and even spencer, but in the end it's nothing spectacular.
and it's naive to think that pilofocus will be available worldwide. 9 of 10 current FUE docs will stick to their method. why should they be interested in learning something new? they even have to buy the equipment and licenses from Dr. wesley.
will they get more profit out of this? i don't think so. so if there's not more money to earn, i don't see doctors adopting this. only a few doctors are eager to always work with the latest technology but most of them don't give a shit at all. hell, there are still a LOT hair transplant docs who are offering strip procedures ONLY because there's no reason for them to try something different. as long as there are customers who pay for the strip procedures, there's no motivation to switch.
it's sad but that's the cruel reality.
however, if pilofocus is a big deal, then everybody still has the possibility to book the treatment at wesley's clinic. so, worldwide availability is not a must.

I think for something new to catch on, it has to offer significant benefits. A virtually scarless procedure is, in my opinion, such progress. Yes, it will pose a financial investment and a learning curve for doctors, but I feel, if it works well (which it seems to me it may), patients will demand it.

It'll eventually be tough for resistant surgeons to continue to say, "Well, F.U.E. scars really aren't too bad, and they can be covered by existing hair," if a well-established, well-advertised, and competitively-priced essentially–scar-free alternative exists.

Also, for doctors themselves, as the surgery instruments become more affordable, and as the clinicians gain comfort with the procedure, piloscopy should not be any more cumbersome than F.U.E.: Easier to avoid transection; shorter surgery-time by not needed technicians to prepare grafts; the ability to harvest grafts from areas where visible scars are to be avoided (e.g., scalp that may bald, regions of the body).

Of everything truly novel that's happened in hair transplantation, piloscopy to me is the most compelling thing since F.U.E.

[HairTalk]

You obviously haven't read any of the old pilofocus threads, and clearly have no idea of acell potential. Dr cole knows it regenerates hairs, but he can't get consistent results and claims because the acell leaks from fue when on the OUTSIDE. If acell were to be packed on the inside where it cannot leak, then the problem would be solved. Also, artista has seen the presentation none of us were allowed to see and he said no doubt it will have regeneration, it's just uncertain how high or low of a percentage we will see consistently.

I don't care about the old PiloFocus "threads," which may contain any amount of hearsay, supposition, hopeful claims, and nonsense. ACell was an exciting proposal when Dr. Cooley, in 2010/11 suggested it could hold the potential for hair-regeneration. To date, that simply has not panned out to any respectable degree. Not in Dr. Cooley's work, not in Dr. Bernstein's work, not in any further publication.

Could ACell in combination with piloscopic harvesting yield regeneration? Maybe. Maybe not. We don't know. Dr. Wesley is researching this, and one hopes that will answer the question adequately.

It's fine to keep your fingers crossed in the back of your mind, but it's imperative not to go jumping around like a blissful jackrabbit about "a sure thing" that is by no means sure.

[hellouser]

How would Acell regenerate an organ that isn't there?

Follicles are being moved from point A to point B with pilofocus, it doesnt transect the follicle.

[HairTalk]

How would Acell regenerate an organ that isn't there?

Follicles are being moved from point A to point B with pilofocus, it doesnt transect the follicle.

I imagine the hope would be to move enough tissue to get proper growth in the recipient area, and leave enough in the donor to get re-growth there. ACell might help achieve this.

Until there's evidence, however, it's just supposition.

[Hicks]

I would be amazed if regeneration can even be tracked. Follicle from donor to recipient area would need to be tracked. Heck, a transfer graft grows in 3-12 months so you would think a regenerated graft/follicle would take longer to form then grow. I was more interested in Acell for healing and to reduce scar tissue. Regeneration was not on my radar but would be great if it did.

Cost needs to be driven down before regeneration.

[HairTalk]

I would be amazed if regeneration can even be tracked. Follicle from donor to recipient area would need to be tracked. Heck, a transfer graft grows in 3-12 months so you would think a regenerated graft/follicle would take longer to form then grow. I was more interested in Acell for healing and to reduce scar tissue. Regeneration was not on my radar but would be great if it did.

Cost needs to be driven down before regeneration.

As I understand, Dr. Wesley intends to track the donor area with tattooing/marking.

I don't think it's at all impossible to measure this, provided the harvesting leaves a small region completely devoid of hair, and the hairs are transplanted to a totally hairless area of the scalp. Count the number of harvested grafts pre-op., then count what re-grows in the donor area and in the recipient area.

[FearTheLoss]

As I understand, Dr. Wesley intends to track the donor area with tattooing/marking.

I don't think it's at all impossible to measure this, provided the harvesting leaves a small region completely devoid of hair, and the hairs are transplanted to a totally hairless area of the scalp. Count the number of harvested grafts pre-op., then count what re-grows in the donor area and in the recipient area.

That's exactly what he is doing. Small cases, tattoos, exactly what everyone was asking Gho to do.

[hellouser]

That's exactly what he is doing. Small cases, tattoos, exactly what everyone was asking Gho to do.

Well... I dont have high hopes for this, but if it works.... oh my, that'd finally be a real and long overdue game changer.

[FearTheLoss]

I'm positive we will get some degree of regeneration. I just don't know how much...but even 20-30% would be huge!

[hellouser]

I'm positive we will get some degree of regeneration. I just don't know how much...but even 20-30% would be huge!

Let's put it this way;

If the average area of balding scalp is 200cm/2, then the required number of grafts to cover this at a low density such as 40 grafts/cm2 would be 8,000 grafts. If an individual has typically 5,000 grafts available (this is being generous as its on the lower end) then 30% of that would allow for an additional 1,666 grafts. However, this is assuming we only use maximum donor amount.... because when regeneration comes into play, we can extract much more... say, 7,000 and allow the 30% to regenerate and you'd be safe.

Furthermore, if Pilofocus works as mentioned and we can expand on donor grafts available, then we can go beyond the small 5,000 grafts number and consequently go beyond that as well with initial regeneration.

But this is all irrelevant as we've been hearing about Acell for years and haven't seen a single documented case of this working that WASN'T a promotional piece from a doctor advertising the treatment. Essentially, this would need a community funded/sponsored/documented 50 graft trial.

[FearTheLoss]

Well regeneration or not, we should be able to extract much more grafts, grafts out of the safe zone, and hopefully body hair with better survival due to it being scarless.