-
Originally Posted by Mathieu
gc83UK, 0,75-1,0mm is widely considered as the typical FUE punch range. You can therefore deduce that our current instrument is smaller than that.
We will unveil our "secrets" soon. But first, we would like to gather more documented results and also to fix a couple of administrative details (nothing illegal, don't worry! ).
OK, I'm assuming it's somewhere between 0.5 to 0.7mm, impressive that it was able to extract a 4FU (#85) in full.
Perhaps you would be able to tell us how labour intensive this procedure is compared to regular FUE?
Also, do you have a picture of the extracted grafts or the grafts in the petri?
-
-
-
Originally Posted by mathieu
ah, if only i had ironman's iq...
lol, zing!
-
[I'm reposting the 12 days post-op picture, so Winston can erase my previous post for more clarity. Thanks.]
The picture above was taken 12 days after the procedure. Please note that the doctor had to shave again the test area, hence the presence of tiny hair debris all over the area (beware, they could mislead you when trying to identify FU exiting the scalp).
h = hair(s)
n/a = transected Follicular Unit, no hair was harvested from it
Reminder: the test area included 100 FU. 60 FU were harvested, and 40 FU were left untouched.
Over the 8 fully transected FU containing a total of 16 hairs (n° 17, 23, 35, 54, 67, 81, 94, 99 ; see previous post), 7 FU fully regrew; only 1 fully transected FU showed partial regrowth (n°99, 1/2 hairs). That is because the transection was performed at a very superficial level, and no true damage was inflicted to the FU's structure.
-> 15/16 hairs regrew, which equals a survival rate of 93,75%.
Details of the 52 FU after their successful removal:
- 7 FU (13,5%) didn't regrow in the donor (n° 14, 34, 38, 61, 71, 83, 90) = 0/11 hairs
- 15 FU (28,8%) partially regrew in the donor = 21/36 hairs
- 30 FU (57,7%) fully regrew = 59/59 hairs
-> 86,5% of the extracted FU did regenerate to various degrees, between 0 and 12 days post-op.
-> 75,5% of the extracted hairs (80/106) did regenerate, between 0 and 12 days post-op.
-
For your information, I did a slight miscount in the "immediately post-op" message (http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showpos...13&postcount=4); I sent the corrected draft to the admin (through the "contact us" form) ... if no action is taken, I'll re-post the right data in another message, but that may become a little confusing ... sorry for the inconvenience.
-
Mathieu,
Photos like these are all well and good, but they always make me wonder... what about the recipient? Are we sure that all of the transplanted hairs grew?
-
So Mathieu, in theory with this technique, you could harvest every hair in the donor section (at least once maybe more) to give even a nw6 or nw7 a full head of hair? By full head of hair I mean nw2 with full dense coverage...
-
Youngin, on this very patient, it's too early yet to comment potential regrowth on the recipient area.
Our current goal is to gather as many proof as possible of the whole process. For now, I can state that we achieve steady donor regeneration... but is it followed by steady recipient regrowth? Honestly, I don't know with certainty yet, and consequently I'd rather remain cautious. It will require several study cases to be assertive on this topic.
FearTheLoss, repeated harvesting of the same FU is an issue to cover with further testing. In fact, Dr Mousseigne did try to remove twice the same FU on a patient, after the first session was successful; he only waited a short lapse of time before he reiterated the harvesting, and he noticed then that no donor regeneration had occured the second time around. It will be interesting to experiment different lapses of time, in order to identify the shortest time interval possible between 2 harvestings of the same FU, while still achieving regeneration.
As for turning a slick Norwood 6-7 into a dense Norwood 2, I guess that's a possibility to consider if the patient has the right donor, favourable hair characteristics, and the motivation to undergo several surgeries.
-
And hear you have it - the next step forward in hair transplantation before our very eyes, Dr Gho, Dr Nigam and now this, it's clear this will become the new standard. You cant exactly refute those pictures no matter how hard you try... I just wonder why Spencer never mentions these types of procedures on his show.
All we need to see now is recipient growth.
Similar Threads
-
By caddarik79 in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 80
Last Post: 05-06-2013, 08:29 AM
-
By didi in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 246
Last Post: 04-05-2013, 02:07 AM
-
By 534623 in forum Techniques in Possible Donor Regeneration and Multiplication
Replies: 0
Last Post: 09-22-2012, 06:44 AM
-
By DepressedByHairLoss in forum Cutting Edge / Future Treatments
Replies: 5
Last Post: 03-01-2012, 08:06 PM
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
|
» IAHRS
» The Bald Truth
» americanhairloss.org
|
Bookmarks