Just read a hair transplant article and now I’m confused.

[J_B_Davis]

I just found this article that interviewed Dr. True who I know is an IAHRS doctor and another doctor who I never heard of. I’m confused about the statement that coronal incisions which I believe are the lateral slits can cause more shock loss. Is this true and if so why is the lateral slit promoted as the best technique?

"It is generally thought that when working in between existing hairs, coronal incisions carry a greater risk of causing follicular damage. In this situation, sagittal incisions may be preferred," Dr. True says.

This statement also confused me. Did he mean it’s common for doctors not on the IAHRS or common in hair transplant surgery in general. If the latter is true then what percentage of people does this happen to?

“Poor growth is a relatively common occurrence after follicular unit transplant surgery. Prevention is the best management for this complication, and that requires understanding of the multiple possible causes,” Dr. True says.

This is the article from Cosmetic Surgery Times. Can any experts please advise?

http://www.modernmedicine.com/modernmedicine/Modern+Medicine+Now/Complications-in-hair-restoration-surgery-are-ofte/ArticleStandard/Article/detail/661444?contextCategoryId=40748

[Winston]

I think he’s stating that in capable hands these complications can be avoided, but I can see how the poor growth statement could be alarming to some readers.

[Delphi]

This has to be a miss quote. If Poor growth was relatively common why would doctors perform hair transplantation?

[Robert True, MD]

This article does not accurately quote my comments during my presentation on complications in hair transplantation. What I said that the problem of poor growth is relatively common when follicular unit transplantation is performed by inexperienced doctors and technicians. It is an uncommon, but not unheard of, complication in practices of the most skilled and experienced hair restoration surgeons. All of the factors I outline in the article do have to routinely and meticulously be excluded in order to eliminate as much as possible cases of poor growth. Cases will still occasionally occur in all high level practices but almost always will be due to patient factors rather than technical matters.

[Winston]

This article does not accurately quote my comments during my presentation on complications in hair transplantation. What I said that the problem of poor growth is relatively common when follicular unit transplantation is performed by inexperienced doctors and technicians. It is an uncommon, but not unheard of, complication in practices of the most skilled and experienced hair restoration surgeons. All of the factors I outline in the article do have to routinely and meticulously be excluded in order to eliminate as much as possible cases of poor growth. Cases will still occasionally occur in all high level practices but almost always will be due to patient factors rather than technical matters.

Thank you for the clarification Dr. True! The article did make it seem like poor growth was very common and since I was under the impression that in the hands of an IAHRS surgeon that this was very rare I was a little concerned as well. I did have a feeling that it was a misquote however

[J_B_Davis]

OK that clears it up. Thanks Dr. True!

[gillenator]

Just to add to this issue. I am seeing more FUE patients who had poor yields/regrowth when some if not a fair amount of the extractions were performed by a tech.

I can't say for sure if this is a trend that is increasing but I would never allow a surgical tech to do my extractions. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of competent and talented techs out there yet I feel only the doctor/surgeon should be making these extractions, not to mention it is the law as I understand it.