GC83UK After 5th HST

[gc83uk]

Another update of where i'm currently up to. 3 weeks ago I had 1200 grafts @ Hasci, bringing my total number of grafts to approx 6100.

In my 5th HST, the grafts we're mainly placed in the frontal areas, either side of the forelock and also around the circumference of the initial balding area to bring an improved contrast and also slightly over the HST1 and HST2 areas. I've not had anything put in the middle back area, (most sparse area) since my 3rd HST, in fact that is the only time I have had any grafts placed there. So if I was to go again then it would be for the grafts to be placed bang in the center.

It's also worth noting that the original balding area was approx 100cm2. However around 1000 grafts have been placed outside that original area in the frontal areas as explained above. So roughly speaking the area is now about 130cm2.

Latest pictures after HST 5 and some experimental photos in different light

[hellouser]

Another update of where i'm currently up to. 3 weeks ago I had 1200 grafts @ Hasci, bringing my total number of grafts to approx 6100.

In my 5th HST, the grafts we're mainly placed in the frontal areas, either side of the forelock and also around the circumference of the initial balding area to bring an improved contrast and also slightly over the HST1 and HST2 areas. I've not had anything put in the middle back area, (most sparse area) since my 3rd HST, in fact that is the only time I have had any grafts placed there. So if I was to go again then it would be for the grafts to be placed bang in the center.

It's also worth noting that the original balding area was approx 100cm2. However around 1000 grafts have been placed outside that original area in the frontal areas as explained above. So roughly speaking the area is now about 130cm2.

Latest pictures after HST 5 and some experimental photos in different light

Thats it? 100cm/2?

If you were to fill that with 40 grafts per cm/2, you'd only need 4,000 grafts which is easily doable even for FUE or FUT. Even at 130cm/2 you only require 5,200 grafts. At that amount though, you're basically at an FUE with the % of failed grafts (about 15% of grafts fail, afaik).

[cocacola]

When we look at those pictures, do we assume hst 5 has fallen out as you had it recently or it didnt yet?

[gc83uk]

Thats it? 100cm/2?

If you were to fill that with 40 grafts per cm/2, you'd only need 4,000 grafts which is easily doable even for FUE or FUT. Even at 130cm/2 you only require 5,200 grafts. At that amount though, you're basically at an FUE with the % of failed grafts (about 15% of grafts fail, afaik).

100cm2 is approx (nice round figure), but I would say the slick area wasn't any greater than 120cm2, that I think I can be sure of. So if we forget about 1000 grafts which have gone outside that area, then that leaves 5000 grafts which have gone into the slick area. So that would be equal to around 40 grafts per cm/2 as you alluded to.

Are you saying I should have gone for FUE/FUT?

[gc83uk]

When we look at those pictures, do we assume hst 5 has fallen out as you had it recently or it didnt yet?

Yes I would think some of it has fallen, how much I don't know! I had it done 3 weeks ago.

[Arashi]

Hey Gaz ! Thanks for the update. Any chance you could shoot a couple of pics tomorrow in daylight, without any flash ? Thanks !

[caddarik79]

Hey Gaz ! Thanks for the update. Any chance you could shoot a couple of pics tomorrow in daylight, without any flash ? Thanks !

it looks very decent, and your donor will be judgeable in a couple of months, but already looking OK.

Did they tell you if you have reached a ceiling? or if you could still safely go for another one or two HST?

[gc83uk]

Hi Arashi,

I tried taking a few today outside, but they're all coming out blurry, i'll try again this weekend when I have some more time.

Btw I did two hair counts on separate areas, the first coming out at 1.41 and the second 1.35.

Hi Caddarik, they didn't talk about the ceiling, but I was quick to mention that this might be my last time, possibly one more. At the moment I don't know. I really need to add some grafts to the middle section now because nothing has been added there since the 3rd HST, so that area has only 1 pass so far, which prob means I have 35 grafts x 1.4 hairs, so about 50 hairs per cm2 in that weak area, which is definitely not enough if I want to grow it any longer. I think I would need 100 hairs per cm2 to have a half decent result.

So if we're saying my total slick area is about 115cm2 (5000 grafts) and maybe another 30cm2 for the frontal areas (1000 grafts)....then those 5000 grafts are only equal to about 7000 hairs, which gives me approx 60 hairs per cm2. That seems like about right at the moment. Some areas are more dense, maybe around 80 hairs and of course some areas 40-50 hairs. All very approx!

I don't know what a realistic target would be for transplanted hair, is it normal to achieve 100 hairs or more per cm2? Any figures here would be useful.

If I have another transplant then I'll only be getting another 1200, roughly 1700 hairs, which will give me another 15 hairs per cm2 on top of the 60 (average) I currently have.

The problem I have is I'm placing these grafts on slick scalp, whereas most people already have native hair to start with, so my question is, is 75 hairs per cm2 too few?

[caddarik79]

Hi Arashi,

I tried taking a few today outside, but they're all coming out blurry, i'll try again this weekend when I have some more time.

Btw I did two hair counts on separate areas, the first coming out at 1.41 and the second 1.35.

Hi Caddarik, they didn't talk about the ceiling, but I was quick to mention that this might be my last time, possibly one more. At the moment I don't know. I really need to add some grafts to the middle section now because nothing has been added there since the 3rd HST, so that area has only 1 pass so far, which prob means I have 35 grafts x 1.4 hairs, so about 50 hairs per cm2 in that weak area, which is definitely not enough if I want to grow it any longer. I think I would need 100 hairs per cm2 to have a half decent result.

So if we're saying my total slick area is about 115cm2 (5000 grafts) and maybe another 30cm2 for the frontal areas (1000 grafts)....then those 5000 grafts are only equal to about 7000 hairs, which gives me approx 60 hairs per cm2. That seems like about right at the moment. Some areas are more dense, maybe around 80 hairs and of course some areas 40-50 hairs. All very approx!

I don't know what a realistic target would be for transplanted hair, is it normal to achieve 100 hairs or more per cm2? Any figures here would be useful.

If I have another transplant then I'll only be getting another 1200, roughly 1700 hairs, which will give me another 15 hairs per cm2 on top of the 60 (average) I currently have.

The problem I have is I'm placing these grafts on slick scalp, whereas most people already have native hair to start with, so my question is, is 75 hairs per cm2 too few?

I think 75 hairs per cm2 is OK, especially in the middle area. You won't be able to enjoy every sort of hair styles, but should be kind of satisfying.

Why wouldn't you go for more after an eventual 6th? just a question...

I 'm curious about your 5th procedure result in a couple of months, when it really grows... and then after a 6th procedure, I guess, you will be totally OK for haircut going from 3mm to 2 cm.

and then, you put it on standby and if real deal multiplication ever happens in 5 or 10 years or 25 years (we don't know), you perfect it!

but Hell, it's just soooo freaking expensive... for a somehow satisfying situation!!!

[Arashi]

Hi Arashi,
I tried taking a few today outside, but they're all coming out blurry, i'll try again this weekend when I have some more time.

Looking forward to them !

Btw I did two hair counts on separate areas, the first coming out at 1.41 and the second 1.35.

That's odd. My count of your recipient, which I documented here came in at 1.28

I don't know what a realistic target would be for transplanted hair, is it normal to achieve 100 hairs or more per cm2? Any figures here would be useful.

Like Rassman & Bernstein explained in their article here is that the safe zone size on average is 25% of 500 cm2, so 375 cm2 is potential recipient, which needs to be filled up with hair from a 125 cm2 region while still keeping that region up to at least half of its original density. That's why you will not see very often that people will fill up any area's with such high density, simply because there's just so little hair to transplant and so much recipient ! But your case is of course very different, since you're not losing hair anymore and your recipient is relatively very small. So why not fill it up to the highest possible density ? So, the only question you should ask yourself, what donor density am I still happy with.

[gc83uk]

Looking forward to them !


That's odd. My count of your recipient, which I documented here came in at 1.28

Yes I had already seen that. I don't think there is anything odd to be honest. different samples will yield different result for sure, especially when relatively small. I will upload the results when next on my laptop.

Also I've noticed that doing a hair count from that angle which you have analysed is much harder and less accurate than when the camera is behind the grafts rather than shooting from in front, simply because the grafts can quite easily appear as 1 hair rather than 2's.

[Arashi]

Yes I had already seen that. I don't think there is anything odd to be honest. different samples will yield different result for sure, especially when relatively small. I will upload the results when next on my laptop.

Also I've noticed that doing a hair count from that angle which you have analysed is much harder and less accurate than when the camera is behind the grafts rather than shooting from in front, simply because the grafts can quite easily appear as 1 hair rather than 2's.

Graft counting will never be 100% accurate, but that works both ways. Like you correctly noted, sometimes you will miss a hair and will count a 2 as 1. But on the other hand, in the analysis I did, I labeled a few time a graft as double when I wasn't sure if it was a double or just two singles quite close together. I favoured them always as being a 2 in my analysis.

That being said, the photo you shot and which I used for my analysis was quite sharp and ideal for analysis ! So I think the result is quite accurate.

[gc83uk]

Graft counting will never be 100% accurate, but that works both ways. Like you correctly noted, sometimes you will miss a hair and will count a 2 as 1. But on the other hand, in the analysis I did, I labeled a few time a graft as double when I wasn't sure if it was a double or just two singles quite close together. I favoured them always as being a 2 in my analysis.

That being said, the photo you shot and which I used for my analysis was quite sharp and ideal for analysis ! So I think the result is quite accurate.

Your result may have been accurate, however that doesn't mean the result really IS 1.28 overall.

Would you like it if the result was higher than 1.28 or would you rather be proven correct?

We can look at another photo if you want and come to a consensus. I'll pick the photo this time though!

[Arashi]

Your result may have been accurate, however that doesn't mean the result really IS 1.28 overall.

Would you like it if the result was higher than 1.28 or would you rather be proven correct?

We can look at another photo if you want and come to a consensus. I'll pick the photo this time though!

You make it sound like I picked a particular photo to favour low graft count. I just took the first photo I thought was clear enough for analysis and then marked a random spot that I was sure was bald area before. I didnt cherry pick anything. I analyzed a total of 583 hairs, I was aiming for at least 500 hairs to lower statistical variance.

But if you want to look at another photo and do a similar analysis, please be my guest ! Make sure you do at least 500 hairs and we can then discuss it here if you want.

[gc83uk]

You make it sound like I picked a particular photo to favour low graft count. I just took the first photo I thought was clear enough for analysis and then marked a random spot that I was sure was bald area before. I didnt cherry pick anything. I analyzed a total of 583 hairs, I was aiming for at least 500 hairs to lower statistical variance.

But if you want to look at another photo and do a similar analysis, please be my guest !

How did you come to that conclusion?

Like I said I have already looked at two other photos and fine a similar analysis.