NeoGraft Hair Transplant: Will this New Device Make FUE More Affordable And Safe?

[SpencerKobren]

The targeted removal of follicular unit grafts, known as Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE), certainly has its place in the field of surgical hair restoration. However, since the procedure has proven to be extremely labor intensive when performed correctly, and limited by the number of grafts that can be safety harvested intact per procedure, many in the field have chosen not to offer this procedure to their patients.

We have also seen some dismal results coming from some of the clinics that have over marketed the procedure without actually learning how to perform it correctly. IAHRS Member, Dr. Alan Feller has repeatedly warned patients about the three detrimental forces that are unique to FUE procedures, these are:

1.Torsion
2.Traction
3.Compression

Will the NeoGraft device help to eliminate these possible detrimental graft destroying forces and allow more hair transplant surgeons to offer FUE to patients who qualify for the procedure?


UPDATED: VIEW IMAGES

[the B spot]

So the device is essentially a 1 step scoring and extraction device? I take it that the grafts are vacuumed out into the receptacle once a certain depth is reached?

A couple of questions:
1. What size is the extraction tool--inner and outer diameter?
2. What potential for damage to the grafts as they are vacuumed out into the receptacle?
3. How does the tool help mimic the graft angle better than a regular hand-held punch?
3a. If this does create an easier extraction method, reducing the above factors laid out by Dr. Feller, is the size of the extraction increased to accommodate a lack of "feel" gained by using a regular punch.

Looks interesting--I would like to see it in action in person.

Take Care,
Jason

[SpencerKobren]

So the device is essentially a 1 step scoring and extraction device? I take it that the grafts are vacuumed out into the receptacle once a certain depth is reached?

A couple of questions:
1. What size is the extraction tool--inner and outer diameter?
2. What potential for damage to the grafts as they are vacuumed out into the receptacle?
3. How does the tool help mimic the graft angle better than a regular hand-held punch?
3a. If this does create an easier extraction method, reducing the above factors laid out by Dr. Feller, is the size of the extraction increased to accommodate a lack of "feel" gained by using a regular punch.

Looks interesting--I would like to see it in action in person.

Take Care,
Jason

Hey Jason,

I’m having Dr. Bauman on the radio program this Sunday 3/15, so feel free to call in with your questions and your FUE insight.

If you don’t have an XM subscription you can watch and listen live here:

http://www.thebaldtruth.com/watch-live/

[the B spot]

Arrrrggg! I will not be able to listen this week!!!! Trust me, I am going to my wife's parent's this weekend----I would much rather listen to your show than listen to them screech at each other for 3-4 hours

I used to wonder why people drank wine at these functions----now I know

Hopefully Dr. Bauman can respond here if/when he finds the time---Technology is so awesome---I know Dr. Shapiro is a real tech nut, so I am bringing this to his attention!

Take Care,
Jason

[SpencerKobren]

No worries Jason,

I’m convinced my future in-laws think I have a drinking problem..I get it! We’ll be archiving the broadcast so you can listen at your leisure.

[HelpROGER]

The video looks impressive. The machine looks like a combination dental drill and water suctioning machine that you see in dentists offices. I assume that there would be less damage done to the follicles since the suction would not be strong enough to rip apart the hairs themselves. Have you ever tried to break a hair, it takes some strength. The skin probably just gives once the cut is made deep enough. I’m no engineer, but this tool looks like it works and if those pictures are the results then they look good.

Spencer, how long has Dr. Bauman been using this thing and on how many patients?

[gillenator]

bspot, I don't know how I missed this before, but I just noticed something classy at your signature. You're a Cubs fan!

Now, back to the issue. Not that I am any expert on FUE instrumentation, nor a licensed physician, but in the past 29 years, I have seen alot of these come and go. Several years or more ago, there was a big hype about the FUE implanter, remember? Where is it now? Where are the published findings? In the New England Journal Of Medicine? No. In the education arm of the ISHRS? No. Any other society or affiliation, association, not to my knowledge. It's just my opinion but this has that sort of laser comb smell to it.

And some of you have brought up some of the valid points that Dr. Feller mentioned in another thread and noted below. Yet if you consider the dynamics of torsion, traction, and compression in the extraction process, are they not ultimately controlled by the tooling as well as the surgeon's feel? What is going to replace the feel in the extraction process? What about dermal depth analysis? Oh, I know someone is going to say, "that's what this new machine is supposed to do".

It's just very difficult for me to imagine that a machine, albeit "cutting edge" technology can make all of the adjustments on every FU targeted for extraction concurrently. And then with the same extraction size for every FU regardless of size. Same size for a single hair FU as a five hair FU extraction? Really? What about extracting MUGs? One size fits all? Really?

I have a hard time believing that any prudent FUE surgeon who also is considering the lowest degree of invasiveness "per patient" is not going to utitlize a combination of punches and extraction tools. How does the FUE surgeon balance out the level of invasiveness (post-op scarring) with transection? Or is the issue going to be pursued and confined to "speed and efficiency" of the extraction process? Give me a break.

Who's ever publishing transection rates or let's be positive about this, FUE YIELDS regardless of the methodology? NO ONE, extraction equipment or not. And before anyone speaks up to dare challenge what I am saying, be ready to present your verifiable and substantiated clinical findings.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for scientific research and technological advancements in this field of surgical hair restoration, and yes there are some docs who always seem to jump on the bandwagon and really push these new devices. Is it really to advance the field or advance one's bank account? And really, I mean no offense to anyone in particular. But ultimately, who is really benefitting from speed and reduced OR staffs? The patient? Really? Really? Or could it just by chance be the clinic or the ones who hold the patent? And why most of the dialogue in the economics and proficiencies of the procedure? What happened to yield?! Every HT patient cares about yield right?

What happened? Did I miss something? What happened to the patient?

[SpencerKobren]

We’ll be continuing the NeoGraft discussion tonight on the live broadcast. If you don't subscribe to XM Satellite Radio, you can watch tonight’s program here:
The Bald Truth Live!

Feel free to call in to join the discussion. The toll free number is 1-877-885-0007. The program airs at 5pmPST/8pmEST.

[PayDay]

Great show last night guys. You guys sounded like you were having a blast. Vey informative as usual too! How come TeeJay got to do the show with you guys. I want in.

Paul

[Winston]

The show was very entertaining , I enjoyed listening very much. Hairloss stuff can be so dry when I read about it, but it’s cool to listen to the people in the know talking about it.

I still don’t know however if the Neograft is a good thing or a bad thing. Spencer seems to be on the fence about it and Dr. Law said it had some value, but Dr. Feller makes it out like it’s worthless. What’s the answer?