Why so many different survival rates for scar grafting?

Help!

I have recently been looking into repairing the donor scar I have from strip surgery. It has not been an easy decision..... I have first looked into micropigmentation but thats not the look i'm looking for, and honestly you can still see the scar. I saw some impressive results from a couple MD's but wonder if that is the exception. I have spoken with 4 very well known MD's and I'm getting a huge success range:

Dr A ..... 30-50% :(
Dr B ..... 85-90% with RPR and Acell :D
Dr C ..... 70% :)
Dr D ..... 30% :mad:

Obviously it is hard to decide what to do with stats like that! :confused:

I'd love to hair (sorry about the lame pun) from a few experts and even patients who have done this.

Thanks!

i would choose none of them. reason – low yield aside, when they try to repair an old scar, they just create losts of new scars therefore. they just spread the old problem, even when the procedure is successful

I ve had 1032 beard grafts , grafted into my strip scars, I have no marks or visible scars on my face ,from the extractions . The grafts are growing and so far at ten months post op the growth is as expected . As with all hair restoration procedures it depends on who is doing the procedure , My Dr is Dr Bisanga at BHR Brussells feel free to have a look at my thread

Dont believe the hype on acell and prp , unproven ,untested and no results

hope this helps

ejj

Are you refering to yield of grafts placed into scar?

I agree with Ejj - Acell has no proven results and on the contrary i've seen a few scars with "acell" and not impressed in my honest opinion. The guinea pigs found that out the hard way:(

Ejj...... I just checked out your link. I have to say, those results look quite good. I'd say you got quite a great success rate. Sort of proves the 30% docs wrong....at least I'm hoping so anyway. I have to asume going in for another round would result in an even better outcome do to better vascular support? I'm hearing the number one problem with scar grafting is the lack of bloodflow or vascular support. If that is the case wouldn't you have a 0% success rate?
Spex..... can you explain why Acell is a waist of money? How did users find out the hard way? Does it do damage?

PM ej above and get his personal opinion.

acell = .. run for the hills ....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ejj

acell = .. run for the hills ....

---

.... Please enlighten me! i wonder why some MD's swear by it and others don't.

probably because there is an economic downturn and they need to sell there procedure harder

Does anyone have links to photos or examples of "Acell disasters"?