a case study of DONOR REGENERATION with the FUE-L Technique by Dr B. MOUSSEIGNE

[Mathieu]

Dear BTT members & users,

as announced in a previous thread (http://www.baldtruthtalk.com/showthread.php?t=11777), I'll gladly share with you proof of effective donor regeneration. Please bear in mind this is just a "teaser" exclusively meant for you, and that we'll provide higher quality documentation in the future (both for medical & commercial purpose).
That being said, I think the following documents should suffice to support our main claim: we do achieve steady donor regeneration thanks to our FUE-L technique. More details about this new technique will be revealed soon, so please be patient and don't misjudge us for not disclosing everything immediately



About the patient:

- 30 yo male
- No medicinal treatment (e.g. finasteride, minoxidil, etc.)
- No previous surgical experience
- Diffuse pattern of hairloss with a slightly receding hairline (NWD2).
- Hair characteristics: black colour, under-average caliber, wavy texture (but regular subcutaneous refractive angles).
- No specific skin condition

Dr Mousseigne qualifies him as a fairly average patient; his thin hair caliber being compensated by a high skin/hair contrast.



About the procedure:

this test was performed in early April 2013. Other similar tests have been done earlier this year and in late 2012.

I decided to analyze and document a restricted perimeter of the whole test area, which included 100 Follicular Units (FU) before the extractions began. I thought this rather large sample would give everybody here a good idea of our technique's efficiency.

Three different steps of the procedure have been precisely analyzed:
- pre-op
- immediately post-op
- 12 days post-op

Each of these steps comes with an annotated macro picture, a chart, and synthetic comments.

If you deem it necessary, I will also be able to provide pictures from the +4 day & +6 day marks. I'll just need a little additional time to annotate and analyze them.



Once again, this study case works as a proof for donor regeneration after FU's extractions. We are not publishing pictures of the recipient area, because it would be too early to notice signs of regrowth anyway. Soon we'll share complete study cases with high standard documentation (including macro polarized shots & overall professional settings).
Thanks for both your interest and understanding.

[Mathieu]

The analyzed perimeter includes 100 Follicular Units (FU). In the chart below, each FU and its type (1 hair, 2 hairs, 3 hairs, 4 hairs) are listed as accurately as the image allowed me to be.





h = hair(s)
FU = Follicular Unit


Follicular Units' breakdown:
FU – 1 hair = 17% (17)
FU – 2 hairs = 68% (68)
FU – 3 hairs = 13% (13)
FU – 4 hairs = 2% (2)

These 100 Follicular Units (FU) contain a total of 200 hairs (h).
That gives a h/FU ratio of 2.0, which matches average caucasian characteristics.

[gc83uk]

Hello Mathieu

Thank you for taking the time! When can we expect to see the post op photo?

Can you tell me what size needles you're using to extract?

Thanks

[Mathieu]

The picture was taken immediately after the Follicular Units' extraction.
For further details, please check out the chart below.





h = hair(s)
FU = Follicular Unit
/ = the FU was left untouched


Over a total of 100 Follicular Units within the test area:
-60 were harvested
-40 were left untouched

Which equals a graft harvesting as high as 60% of all the FU within the test area.

With traditional FUE (# FUE-L), it is recommended not to harvest more than 30% of FU of a given area, following a specific harvesting pattern, so the patient won't suffer from visible scarring (i.e. sum of hypopigmented dots) and/or donor depletion.
With traditional FUE, 60% FU harvesting would most likely cause the aforementioned problems.


Further details:

FU– 1 hair = approx. 3,3% of the attempted removals (2/60) ; 50% succesful removal rate (1/2 h)
FU– 2 hairs = approx. 73,3% of the attempted removals (44/60) ; 80,7% succesful removal rate (71/88 h)
FU– 3 hairs = 20% of the attempted removals (12/60) ; 75% successful removal rate (27/36 h)
FU– 4 hairs = approx. 3,3% of the attempted removals (2/60) ; 87,5% successful removal rate (7/8 h)

total of hairs available in the 60 FU = 134
total of hairs successfully removed = 106
total of hairs transected = 28


Summary:

60% of the Follicular Units available in the test area were harvested, which is twice the amount recommended with traditional FUE (in order to avoid donor depletion or excessive visible scarring); if no donor regeneration would occur in the test area, a lack of hair could definitely be observed at the end of the healing phase. We'll see if that actually occured with our next picture (taken 12 days post-op).

Over 134 hairs available for removal's attempt, 106 were successfully harvested, which equals an average successful rate of 79,1%, all FU's types combined.
We will observe the evolution of the transected hairs on the next picture, taken 12 days post-op.

With 106 hairs successfully harvested from 52 FU (the other 8 FU - n° 17, 23, 35, 54, 67, 81, 94, 99 - were fully transected and no hair was harvested), the average transplanting ratio is 2,01 h/FU, which relates to the average ratio for traditional follicular units transplants (1,8-2,4 h/FU, with variations below or above this range, depending on the type of recipient area; e.g. lower ratio on the hairline, higher ratio on the posterior parts). Once transplanted, and if the growth rate is good, these grafts should produce regular density, as observed with traditional follicular unit transplants (i.e. FUT & FU

[534623]

Once again, this study case works as a proof for donor regeneration ...

I always thought that "donor regeneration" is just a mythos?

All of a sudden it's so "cool & easy" ...

[Mathieu]

Hello Mathieu

Thank you for taking the time! When can we expect to see the post op photo?

Can you tell me what size needles you're using to extract?

Thanks

Hi gc83uk, I'm posting the different steps progressively, instead of putting everything into one big bulky message. So if you want to link one of the specific steps in another conversation, you'll be able to do so.
The third one (12 days post-op) will be published in just a few minutes.

Regarding the exact instruments used for the procedure, I can't disclose them yet. But I'll give you a hint: it's smaller than regular FUE's punches.

I always thought that "donor regeneration" is just a mythos?

All of a sudden it's so "cool & easy" ...

Hello IM, did my posts give the impression that donor regeneration is a "cool & easy" thing? If so, I misrepresentated my thoughts.

[gc83uk]

Hi gc83uk, I'm posting the different steps progressively, instead of putting everything into one big bulky message. So if you want to link one of the specific steps in another conversation, you'll be able to do so.
The third one (12 days post-op) will be published in just a few minutes.

Regarding the exact instruments used for the procedure, I can't disclose them yet. But I'll give you a hint: it's smaller than regular FUE's punches.




Hello IM, did my posts give the impression that donor regeneration is a "cool & easy" thing? If so, I misrepresentated my thoughts.

OK, is it also smaller than what you were using back in e.g 2007, 0.75 punch?

When can we expect you to disclose more details and what is the reason for the current secrecy?

[FearTheLoss]

Thank you very much for posting these. It's nice to have someone come on here and post information the way you do so precisely.

Again, and I think I'm saying this for the whole Bald Truth Talk community, we appreciate your efforts.

FTL

[534623]

Regarding the exact instruments used for the procedure, I can't disclose them yet. But I'll give you a hint: it's smaller than regular FUE's punches.

Let me guess ...

In one of your photos I can see "FUE-L".
"L" for "longitudinal" FUE? FUE is always a "longitudinal" extraction. Thus, the question is rather: What needle size is used to extract grafts longitudinal?

If the needle is smaller as with normal FUE extractions for INTACT follicles - in this case, it's not "FUE" anymore, because "FUE" is defined as extraction of INTACT follicles/follicular units.

[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! ).