Dr. Cooley and ACell

This is a message to Dr. Cooley. Toward the end of 2010, we all became quite excited to hear of your promising results with ACell. I recall hearing you would be carrying on experiments with the compound to see whether it could, indeed, be used to "clone" hair follicles (in conjunction with plucking, I believe) (i.e., via regeneration in the donor area).

It now being the middle of 2011, and thus more than six months' having passed since the end of 2010, I wonder if you may share with us what, if any, results you are seeing in this work of yours.

Thank you.

NHI ACell Update?
June 27 2011, 2:58 pm PT | Posted in: ACell

Dear Dr. Rassman

You posted on the 5th Nov 2010 that NHI was conducting a study using Acell for hair multiplication. As we are now half way through 2011 I am wondering if you have any updates in regards to the results you’ve experience so far. I’ve heard stuff from Dr. Cooley and Dr. Cole but nothing from yourself so far.

I look forward to your answer.

Regards

I have seen most of the half dozen people that I performed ACell plucking procedures. They averaged 200-300 plucked grafts. Although there was some growth from the plucked hairs, there was just as much growth in the control group as in the ACell treated group. I would conclude from this that I have not replicated the results reported by others.

With regard to the large number of patients where I used ACell in the wounds of strip surgeries, I have seen some value, although I have not called them all back to evaluate their wounds.

For hair multiplication, I am not considering performing more of these procedures until I view the results of others at the upcoming ISHRS meeting in Anchorage, Alaska this September.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

This is a message to Dr. Cooley. Toward the end of 2010, we all became quite excited to hear of your promising results with ACell. I recall hearing you would be carrying on experiments with the compound to see whether it could, indeed, be used to "clone" hair follicles (in conjunction with plucking, I believe) (i.e., via regeneration in the donor area).

It now being the middle of 2011, and thus more than six months' having passed since the end of 2010, I wonder if you may share with us what, if any, results you are seeing in this work of yours.

Thank you.

---

Thank you for your interest. Our work with autocloning/hair duplication continues. As I've mentioned recently, we are compiling our cases to present as a series in the fall. This will give people a much more accurate idea of what they can expect. When a single patient is presented with good results, perhaps what appears to be 90% graft take, then people naturally assume that is what they can expect. Conversely, if a patient with 30% growth is presented, that is what people will expect. It is better to see a group of 10 patients for example, to see the range of results that can be achieved.

We did this case yesterday and it illustrates some important points. This patient has diffuse patterned alopecia and did not want strip or FUE transplants. We performed a test 3 months ago of 400 2 hair plucked grafts and the patient reported positive results. Normally we would wait at least 6 months to make a judgement on this but his job situation dictated that this would be the best time to do a larger case.

Photos show the pre-test appearance (with long hair) and the immediate post-op photo of the test zone. He shaved his head to facilitate the larger grafting procedure and the second photo is the 3 month result showing evident hair growth (perhaps 50% at 3 months?) in the test area. It is much more difficult to assign a % value to the success than might be supposed. There is also skin darkening but this is mostly due to temporary increased vascularity from ACell which will likely fade over time. Close up photos show the center of the test zone with not only the dark grafted hairs growing but also what appears to be some thickening of the miniaturized hairs in between; compare this to the scalp immediately adjacent to the test area.

We performed approximately 3000 plucked grafts and these were placed at relatively low density over the entire thinning area. The goal is to not only get 3000 grafts of new hair, but also to thicken miniaturizing hairs in between the grafts. We will determine this in 12 months.

Thanks again for your interest. I will be presenting more results in a few months.

Regards

Dr Cooley

Dear Dr. Cooley

Thank you for coming on here and answering our questions. It's great to hear about your progress with Acell and plucking and to see pictures too.

I was just wondering if you could shed any light on why Dr. Rassman does not seem to have gotten the same positive results as yourself? Could you not work with these other doctors to show them how you're achieving such results? Surely the more doctors there are all working using the same technique then the sooner Acell and plucking may become the standard of care thus saving many people from the unpleasent scaring commonly associated with conventional hair transplants.

Thank you once again for all the hard work you're putting in to try and find a solution to hair loss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerry Cooley, MD

Thank you for your interest. Our work with autocloning/hair duplication continues. As I've mentioned recently, we are compiling our cases to present as a series in the fall. This will give people a much more accurate idea of what they can expect. When a single patient is presented with good results, perhaps what appears to be 90% graft take, then people naturally assume that is what they can expect. Conversely, if a patient with 30% growth is presented, that is what people will expect. It is better to see a group of 10 patients for example, to see the range of results that can be achieved.

We did this case yesterday and it illustrates some important points. This patient has diffuse patterned alopecia and did not want strip or FUE transplants. We performed a test 3 months ago of 400 2 hair plucked grafts and the patient reported positive results. Normally we would wait at least 6 months to make a judgement on this but his job situation dictated that this would be the best time to do a larger case.

Photos show the pre-test appearance (with long hair) and the immediate post-op photo of the test zone. He shaved his head to facilitate the larger grafting procedure and the second photo is the 3 month result showing evident hair growth (perhaps 50% at 3 months?) in the test area. It is much more difficult to assign a % value to the success than might be supposed. There is also skin darkening but this is mostly due to temporary increased vascularity from ACell which will likely fade over time. Close up photos show the center of the test zone with not only the dark grafted hairs growing but also what appears to be some thickening of the miniaturized hairs in between; compare this to the scalp immediately adjacent to the test area.

We performed approximately 3000 plucked grafts and these were placed at relatively low density over the entire thinning area. The goal is to not only get 3000 grafts of new hair, but also to thicken miniaturizing hairs in between the grafts. We will determine this in 12 months.

Thanks again for your interest. I will be presenting more results in a few months.

Regards

Dr Cooley

---

1. Thank you for replying, Dr. Cooley. How soon after the conference in fall, 2011, can we (i.e., folk in this forum) expect to read what was shared?

2. If I am correct in understanding, then, this patient has now received 3,400 grafts, all from plucking — no F.U.E. or strip-harvesting. Is this correct?

3. Was ACell applied to this patient's donor area or recipient recipient area, or to both?

Again, thanks.

Wow thanks Dr Cooley its nice to get a really good picture gallery for this.

Btw can you please say this patient a thank you from me because he offered himself with a shaved head. I Appreciate this because it really shows the results better.

Nice, but i have to say Dr Cooley, even if you would pluck some Grafts and only 30 to 40% will grow in the recipient site, its just amazing and wil obviously help people.

Please keep up this amazing work or yours, there is nothing more to say

This is fantastic stuff. Thanks Dr. Cooley for chiming in - after Dr. Rassman and Dr. Epstein reported little to no results, we were starting to get disenchanted.. Interesting that results were coming in at 3 months - I always understood that regrowth takes longer ie. 6 months for plucking..

Woah this is amazing, you can actually see an improvement!

And this is just by plucking hairs? - Why didnt anyone think of this 30 years ago?

Uk hats easy to answer because back in those days it was all about sudokus and masturbation (sorry Dr Cooley this is an insider joke here) :-)

Btw where did Dr Bernstein report no results? Even Rassman reported that plucked hairs grow but in the same way like the test site without Acell, but nevertheless i dont blieve anything Rassmann says.

Thank you so much Dr. Cooley! This gives us all hope. This forum is great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

1. Thank you for replying, Dr. Cooley. How soon after the conference in fall, 2011, can we (i.e., folk in this forum) expect to read what was shared?

2. If I am correct in understanding, then, this patient has now received 3,400 grafts, all from plucking — no F.U.E. or strip-harvesting. Is this correct?

3. Was ACell applied to this patient's donor area or recipient recipient area, or to both?

Again, thanks.

---

Hairtalk maybe I can answer this for you.

1. I would assume, like last year, that Cooley will post his presentation on BTT for all to see.

2. If you read again what he wrote, you'll clearly see that they are all plucked hairs. He says they are plucked. He also said the patient didn't want FUT or FUE.

3. I don't think Dr. Cooley would apply Acell to the donor since he's only plucking hairs and there's no doubt they grow back.

Looks good. Just wonder how much such a difficult and time-consuming procedure costs. Any one know how much is it per plucked hair.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatientlyWaiting

Looks good. Just wonder how much such a difficult and time-consuming procedure costs. Any one know how much is it per plucked hair.

---

I'd think it would be at least significantly less than F.U.E., let alone strip-harvesting. With plucking, one would avoid the laboriousness of carefully extracting individual follicular units (as in F.U.E.), and of dissecting grafts under a microscope (as with strip-harvesting). Still technicians could be used to do the plucking, and to assemble the necessary "follicle groupings," but, altogether, I believe the process should be faster and cheaper than F.U.E. or F.U.T.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolvie1985

3. I don't think Dr. Cooley would apply Acell to the donor since he's only plucking hairs and there's no doubt they grow back.

---

Well, let's not go down that (Dr. Cole's) road again, here, but I still would like to know whether Dr. Cooley used ACell in the donor/plucked areas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

Well, let's not go down that (Dr. Cole's) road again, here, but I still would like to know whether Dr. Cooley used ACell in the donor/plucked areas.

---

I believe he did, think he said so in his post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

I'd think it would be at least significantly less than F.U.E., let alone strip-harvesting. With plucking, one would avoid the laboriousness of carefully extracting individual follicular units (as in F.U.E.), and of dissecting grafts under a microscope (as with strip-harvesting). Still technicians could be used to do the plucking, and to assemble the necessary "follicle groupings," but, altogether, I believe the process should be faster and cheaper than F.U.E. or F.U.T.

---

Do these hairs get plucked from the beard and mustache? And to do this procedure do you have to go to Dr Cooley with a face full of beard?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatientlyWaiting

Do these hairs get plucked from the beard and mustache? And to do this procedure do you have to go to Dr Cooley with a face full of beard?

---

I believe Dr. Cooley experimented with beard-plucks, earlier, but found the results to be mediocre. I'm quite sure the plucked donations of these patient were taken from the back of his scalp.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

I believe Dr. Cooley experimented with beard-plucks, earlier, but found the results to be mediocre. I'm quite sure the plucked donations of these patient were taken from the back of his scalp.

---

Okay this is new to me, thanks.

So now instead of scarring your back or doing all of that strip stuff they use to do, they're doing plucking form the back. That's pretty cool. I thought they were doing plucking from the beard.

So you think that this will cost less than FUE and FUT?

What I don't get is, if it's plucked hairs that are being put on your front and top, how are these hairs going to keep growing healthy and thick? Like it's only the hair follicle that is being placed there, how is it going to keep growing. Is there something i'm missing here? I know for FUE and FUT they take more than just the hair follicle.

Sorry for the stupid question, i'm new to this. And how much longer for this to actually be out in the market? Or does Dr Cooley do this already. It sounds interesting.

Well to make you sound less stupid I wanna know what exactly is plucking?

This sounds exciting but do we have a reason to be excited or is this gonna be another let down? So far so good but there is always something that ****s everything up. I'm not too sure but didn't someone -maybe a doctor- say plucking didn't work ?

Im not convinced by the photo.

Its hard to tell with certainity, but heres before and after picture where I show some guide lines.

If i understand it correctly the first procedure was done with the long hair, and the buzzed is after photo.

The angle is a bit different but I tried to draw a yellow line in the thinned areas and a red circle around the hair where theres more density.

Ah i forgot, its debris, the guy who rather like to come up with fancy peptides to buy and dismisses everything related to surgical procedures.

Plucked hair we have human results

Your fancy peptides we have no results or only mice pictures

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardDawkins

Ah i forgot, its debris, the guy who rather like to come up with fancy peptides to buy and dismisses everything related to surgical procedures.

Plucked hair we have human results

Your fancy peptides we have no results or only mice pictures

---

I'm not posting this to upset ppl. Im just posting what im seeing. I would wish the plucked hairs worked as well. Im balding the same as u guys are.

And no, I rly have nothing against surgical treatments. If done correctly they do give improvements and when combined with preservation of donor, they could bring us step closer to a nw7 cure.

Dr. Cooley,
you plucked 3400 2 hair Grafts?
Is it not possible to pluck grafts with more than 2 hairs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by debris

Im not convinced by the photo.

Its hard to tell with certainity, but heres before and after picture where I show some guide lines.

If i understand it correctly the first procedure was done with the long hair, and the buzzed is after photo.

The angle is a bit different but I tried to draw a yellow line in the thinned areas and a red circle around the hair where theres more density.

---

Rubbish, there is a clear difference, if this was applied to the entire scalp you would probably be reversing 3 - 5 years of hair loss, out of all those hairs he plucked and implanted, nobody here can tell me ALL were failures, some worked, and if some worked, then the process works, it just needs improving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UK_

Rubbish, there is a clear difference, if this was applied to the entire scalp you would probably be reversing 3 - 5 years of hair loss, out of all those hairs he plucked and implanted, nobody here can tell me ALL were failures, some worked, and if some worked, then the process works, it just needs improving.

---

im somehow glad that u see a difference. its better to be the only that is not convinced, than having another treatment that would not work that well as everyone thinks.

anyway, I appretiate what Dr Cooley is doing and hopefuly there will be more cases bringing a clearer evidence.

I honestly don't see any real difference. 3 months post op will hardly be enough for the plucked grafts to regenerate and grow 1/2 inch in length (not even counting the usual pre-growth telogen), which the picture would indicate if growth was evident. If there is any slight difference in density at all, it's likely just plucked hairs that haven't fallen out yet.

I think Rassman's findings are interesting. Plucking may very well be the way forward in HM, but Acell alone might be an insufficient delivery medium. I think it's safe to say that plucked grafts don't regenerate either because fibrosis prevents adequate perfusion and/or there isn't enough of a stimuli to cause SC migration to the area. In regard to the former, there are a couple of known agents that seem to inhibit fibrosis. Decorin is one of them, which I'd love to see being used in conjunction with Acell. SC migration shouldn't be a problem since the anecdotal success proves the inductive capability of the plucked grafts, but can, obviously, be improved, e.g. by enriching the delivery medium with SCs from a compatible population.

I'd really love to see further experiments with this method in any case, and not just to assume that the current Acell solution is as good as it gets.

At lest hair plucking works even in absence of Acell, so i say we need some stem cell cultivation liquids or stuff.

And there is a huge difference because it seems more euqal in patterns

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatientlyWaiting

Okay this is new to me, thanks.

So now instead of scarring your back or doing all of that strip stuff they use to do, they're doing plucking form the back. That's pretty cool. I thought they were doing plucking from the beard.

So you think that this will cost less than FUE and FUT?

What I don't get is, if it's plucked hairs that are being put on your front and top, how are these hairs going to keep growing healthy and thick? Like it's only the hair follicle that is being placed there, how is it going to keep growing. Is there something i'm missing here? I know for FUE and FUT they take more than just the hair follicle.

Sorry for the stupid question, i'm new to this. And how much longer for this to actually be out in the market? Or does Dr Cooley do this already. It sounds interesting.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Flowers

Well to make you sound less stupid I wanna know what exactly is plucking?

---

The idea is, if plucked hairs grow with reliably high yield (I believe, in his initial work [the results of which he shared in 2010], Dr. Cooley found hairs taken from the back of the scalp gave higher yield than those taken from the beard) — at least comparable to that with which grow grafts in F.U.T. or F.U.E. — you have a surgical option wherein there's an unlimited donor supply (as plucked hairs should grow back).

As I said, I don't see how plucking — if it does pan out as a stand-alone option — should cost as much as F.U.E., let alone F.U.T. "Plucking" is simply the pulling out of a hair with a pair of tweezers. Sure, one must be careful to extract as much of the root as possible, and to not just produce a severed shaft, but there's no great time, skill, or invasion required. Once collected, plucked hairs could need to be grouped together microscopically, to imitate follicular units (as only individual hairs, and not a full units, could be tweezed), but this hardly would be as laborious as what's entailed in F.U.E. or F.U.T. I imagine ACell could be quite costly, and this dollar-value would need to be considered should it turn out the compound must be used to facilitate good results from plucking, but, otherwise, I believe "pluck-surgery" should reduce the cost-to-consumer of hair transplantation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VictimOfDHT

This sounds exciting but do we have a reason to be excited or is this gonna be another let down? So far so good but there is always something that ****s everything up. I'm not too sure but didn't someone -maybe a doctor- say plucking didn't work ?

---

Right now, I think none of us knows. The doctors trying this out must have the best idea, but I think even most of them (and there're not many: I know Drs. Cooley and Bernstein and working on it; no other prominent names come to mind) are waiting to see the results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UK_

Rubbish, there is a clear difference, if this was applied to the entire scalp you would probably be reversing 3 - 5 years of hair loss, out of all those hairs he plucked and implanted, nobody here can tell me ALL were failures, some worked, and if some worked, then the process works, it just needs improving.

---

Well, I don't know that's true: If Dr. Cooley plucked 3,400 hairs, and 200 of them grow in, his yield would be ~6% — that's appallingly low compared with the 90+% most F.U.T./F.U.E. procedures are supposed to give, and, if this happens, I don't think anyone would want to seriously pursue ironing the "kinks" out of plucking. If, on the other hand, he gets upward of 70% growth, I do think it will be something remarkable, exciting, and promising.

I think, unfortunately, Dr. Cooley does a bad job presenting his work in photographs. I agree with Debris and Plopp in that, were I not guided to do so, I honestly would not find any difference in Dr. Cooley's before-and-after images posted on the first page of this thread. I very much hope the other patients of Cooley on whom he's been trying this method are Norwood VIIs, or close to, for on them one could clearly interpret growth and lack thereof, rather than just try to hunt for particular strands of hay in a somewhat-thinned haystack.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RichardDawkins

At lest hair plucking works even in absence of Acell, so i say we need some stem cell cultivation liquids or stuff.

And there is a huge difference because it seems more euqal in patterns

---

How can you claim to see a "huge difference"? The statement reminds me of the social experiment/prank wherein persons insist they can taste the grandeur of an expensive brand of bottled water, which ultimately is revealed to be collected from a garden hose.

Even if plucking works perfectly — let's say 100% yield — it's not believed to avoid the necessary ~four-month period in which grafts, initially shed, grow back (and are not seen). Dr. Cooley's "after" image was taken three months post-op.: how could those longer hairs be regrown grafts? Even with F.U.T. or F.U.E. — which are proved procedures — one rather more likely would not have visible evidence of re-growth at the three-month mark, would one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerry Cooley, MD

We performed approximately 3000 plucked grafts and these were placed at relatively low density over the entire thinning area. The goal is to not only get 3000 grafts of new hair, but also to thicken miniaturizing hairs in between the grafts. We will determine this in 12 months.

---

Dr. Cooley, will this patient's donor zone be monitored in addition to his recipient?

If we may ask, what does your clinic currently charge for a fully-plucked procedure, relative to what it charges for F.U.T. or for F.U.E.?

Thank you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

Well, I don't know that's true: If Dr. Cooley plucked 3,400 hairs, and 200 of them grow in, his yield would be ~6% — that's appallingly low compared with the 90+% most F.U.T./F.U.E. procedures are supposed to give, and, if this happens, I don't think anyone would want to seriously pursue ironing the "kinks" out of plucking. If, on the other hand, he gets upward of 70% growth, I do think it will be something remarkable, exciting, and promising.

I think, unfortunately, Dr. Cooley does a bad job presenting his work in photographs. I agree with Debris and Plopp in that, were I not guided to do so, I honestly would not find any difference in Dr. Cooley's before-and-after images posted on the first page of this thread. I very much hope the other patients of Cooley on whom he's been trying this method are Norwood VIIs, or close to, for on them one could clearly interpret growth and lack thereof, rather than just try to hunt for particular strands of hay in a somewhat-thinned haystack.

---

HairTalk, correct me if I am wrong, but the small thatch of hair in the frontal area was 400 twin-hair plucked grafts in which an average regrowth rate of circa 50% was seen, the results of the rest of the scalp (3000 plucked grafts) will be determined after a period of 12 months.

It is too early for Dr Cooley to state whether the 3000 grafts were successful, but the point of my post was that we have not seen a total failure of this process, we must be positive of the fact that atleast some hairs are growing back, conflate these findings with that of Dr Coles and I truly believe there is atleast something, small it may be, to be positive about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HairTalk

Even if plucking works perfectly — let's say 100% yield — it's not believed to avoid the necessary ~four-month period in which grafts, initially shed, grow back (and are not seen). Dr. Cooley's "after" image was taken three months post-op.: how could those longer hairs be regrown grafts? Even with F.U.T. or F.U.E. — which are proved procedures — one rather more likely would not have visible evidence of re-growth at the three-month mark, would one?

---

Exactly, hence the 12 month wait.

You know what I hate, when a doctor comes here, says a few words that gets us all excited, then leaves to never be seen again, at least for some time, leaving us with even more questions than answers. Do they do this on purpose ? I have no doubt they do. It's not about "being busy" either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by VictimOfDHT

You know what I hate, when a doctor comes here, says a few words that gets us all excited, then leaves to never be seen again, at least for some time, leaving us with even more questions than answers. Do they do this on purpose ? I have no doubt they do. It's not about "being busy" either.

---

Well, what's a good alternative? Doctors come on to share their results when they feel it is appropriate to do so. Would it be preferable for people to hear nothing at all until it catches on as a new "gold standard"? Should doctors instead constantly monitor fora such as this, and post responses when they've nothing new to say?

I feel you're being a bit unfair.

What's being unfair has to do with it ? We're not asking them to tell us stuff they don't know. Nor are we asking them to tell us what the future holds. We're asking them about stuff they themselves choose to come here to tell us about, as if to entice us. Coming here a second time or a third to answer a question or two does NOT require them to sit here and "monitor" the forum. As you can see, many people post questions following a post/thread by a doctor but in many cases their questions go unanswered, and they keep checking and checking.
At least it would be nice to let us know that's all they have and won't be commenting/answering any questions until they have something new.

@VODHT - to be fair, we are only at the half-way point since Dr Cooley stated there would be an update, I didnt even expect Dr Cooley to respond yet.

Thanks again for all the comments and questions. I do not routinely monitor this forum and count on Spencer giving me a heads up if there is something I need to respond to.

Since I presented my work with ACell, many physicians asked me about using it and I have since heard good feedback from them regarding the results (for standard transplants). I am in constant communication with several colleagues investigating ACell. The main way we exchange information is at our annual ISHRS scientific meeting, which is in Anchorage, Alaska this September. I will be leading a symposium on ACell and will be joined by Gary Hitzig and John Cole. I believe Jim DeYarmen will be discussing his work with ACell/PRP and hopefully Drs Rassman and Bernstein will be sharing their results as well.

A few more comments about the plucked technique. It's much more difficult than it sounds. There are many nuances to it that simply have to be worked through by trying it over and over. I do monitor donor areas and no one has complained of any permanent thinning, although the time to full regrowth has been surprising variable, from 2 months to 6 months. The actual regrowth of the grafts is even more variable, reflecting variability in the regeneration process rather than the telogen cycling seen in standard transplants.

To be clear, I spend most of my time doing standard FUT. I think anyone who is a good candidate for medical treatment and standard FUE/FUT should follow this route. For those absolutely opposed to FUE/FUT, this might be a consideration but all of the inherent uncertainties have to be accepted. It is also a consideration for patients in need of repair who have minimal standard donor areas.

I understand the frustration about this new technique and the lack of information. I can only ask that people keep an open mind and have patience as the process unfolds. In my opinion, the fact that we are ever able to regenerate new follicles opens up an exciting avenue of study for hair restoration. In the coming years, new treatements like Histogen, Aderans, RepliCell, etc technologies will add to this new paradigm of regenerative hair restoration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jerry Cooley, MD

Thanks again for all the comments and questions. I do not routinely monitor this forum and count on Spencer giving me a heads up if there is something I need to respond to.

Since I presented my work with ACell, many physicians asked me about using it and I have since heard good feedback from them regarding the results (for standard transplants). I am in constant communication with several colleagues investigating ACell. The main way we exchange information is at our annual ISHRS scientific meeting, which is in Anchorage, Alaska this September. I will be leading a symposium on ACell and will be joined by Gary Hitzig and John Cole. I believe Jim DeYarmen will be discussing his work with ACell/PRP and hopefully Drs Rassman and Bernstein will be sharing their results as well.

A few more comments about the plucked technique. It's much more difficult than it sounds. There are many nuances to it that simply have to be worked through by trying it over and over. I do monitor donor areas and no one has complained of any permanent thinning, although the time to full regrowth has been surprising variable, from 2 months to 6 months. The actual regrowth of the grafts is even more variable, reflecting variability in the regeneration process rather than the telogen cycling seen in standard transplants.

To be clear, I spend most of my time doing standard FUT. I think anyone who is a good candidate for medical treatment and standard FUE/FUT should follow this route. For those absolutely opposed to FUE/FUT, this might be a consideration but all of the inherent uncertainties have to be accepted. It is also a consideration for patients in need of repair who have minimal standard donor areas.

I understand the frustration about this new technique and the lack of information. I can only ask that people keep an open mind and have patience as the process unfolds. In my opinion, the fact that we are ever able to regenerate new follicles opens up an exciting avenue of study for hair restoration. In the coming years, new treatements like Histogen, Aderans, RepliCell, etc technologies will add to this new paradigm of regenerative hair restoration.

---

Thank you, Dr. Cooley. So, first, again, have you been treating the donor area of pluck-transplants with ACell, P.R.P., or any other compound, to facilitate minimal loss? It sounds as if plucking, by itself and with no "support," might not be exactly the source of "guaranteed-limitless supply" many of us have assumed.

Second, we do thank you for sharing with us your time and your knowledge, and we eagerly await hearing what was said at September, 2011's I.S.H.R.S. meeting.

Does anybody know if the hair is permanent with this plucking method?

[QUOTE=HairTalk;33443]Thank you, Dr. Cooley. So, first, again, have you been treating the donor area of pluck-transplants with ACell, P.R.P., or any other compound, to facilitate minimal loss? It sounds as if plucking, by itself and with no "support," might not be exactly the source of "guaranteed-limitless supply" many of us have assumed.

A few months ago, ACell came out with finer particles that can be injected so we have been injecting the donor areas prior to plucking but have no results to share yet. As I have said before, this was never thought of as a 'limitless supply' but rather an 'expanded supply' that has some unique advantages depending on the patient. Moreover, it shows us the very real possibility of in situ follicle regeneration; this is the future in my opinion.