New user; 7-weeks post-procedure

[jetfan11]

Oh and "chewed out" just means really really thin.

So my frontal 1/3 was pretty thick with mostly previous grafts not native hair and not its super thin. Basically see through.

[win200]

My hunch is that if the surrounding hair is all previously transplanted hair, you're going to see significant improvement. Permanent shock loss is caused when the hair is already on its way out due to MPB, and the trauma from surgery just makes the hair permanently shed a bit sooner than it otherwise would. But if the hair is transplanted from the permanent zone, it's not susceptible to MPB. Unless there was a HUGE amount of transection, which would cause permanent loss as Gill said, there's no reason to think that the shocked out prior-transplanted hair won't regrow once it's exited the telogen phase that was instigated by the surgery. And take this as encouragement: I also had a procedure with Niedbalski, and if I experienced transection, it certainly wasn't minor, as I didn't have a drastic amount of hair fall out afterwards without recovery. So it's unlikely that he would somehow commit widespread transection in your case. Also, while he is not one of the elite surgeons, he's also not a rookie; he's been doing HTs for over fifteen years, I believe. With that volume of procedures, I'd be fairly shocked if he hadn't become fairly adept at avoiding transection, which I think is a fairly rookie mistake committed by surgeons who aren't very experienced with HTs. (Gill, may be useful for your to chime in on that point.)

Also, given how worried you are, I'd seek out a second opinion. Steven Gable is an IAHRS surgeon in Portland. Hasson & Wong is nearby in Vancouver. Make an appointment, and simply ask that they examine your work and give a frank assessment. Dr. Gable did that for me with no problem, and it was an enormous load off my mind. He took a thorough look at my work, gave his opinion of my recovery, things he would have done differently or similarly, etc. Second opinions never hurt, particularly if you're alarmed about the work you've received.

[jetfan11]

Win,

Hey buddy. Thanks for your interest. Im really confused about your post you said:

"I also had a procedure with Niedbalski, and if I experienced transection, it certainly wasn't minor, as I didn't have a drastic amount of hair fall out afterwards without recovery."

If it wasn't minor than that would imply you did lose a lot of hair without recovery???

Did you mean to say it certainly WAS minor?

Please clarify. Sorry Im frikkin sensitive these days.

You bring up a good point on transection. Niedbalski has been around the block and back he's not elite but uses latest techniques and been doing it for 15 years. So I guess the question is transection when planting amongst existing hairs something that only really sleazy or inexperienced surgeons do to patients or is it something a middle of the road guy like Niedbalski could do on a bad day. You bring up a great great point there! Is transection only likely with a really bad surgeon?

[win200]

Oops, I mis-typed; I meant to say any transection that I may have experienced wasn't major. My mistake.

[gillenator]

Oops, I mis-typed; I meant to say any transection that I may have experienced wasn't major. My mistake.

That is encouraging to hear Win.

[gillenator]

I remember him joining MHR just before I left. I had never ever seen MHR use any scopes to dissect whatsoever and had visited and observed their clinic locations in several states. IMHO, I would rate his results similiar to a Dr. in the same area or even a Dr. Ziering, another former MHR doctor who practices in California.

My guess then is that he instituted scopes in his private practice. IMHO, cutting down the hair length within the recipient area is the best way to note direction and angulation. The longer the hair length, the more gravity pulls the hair shafts downward and can be misleading. Many docs will buzz the area down to about a 1/4 inch in length to see the acute angulation of the shorter hair shafts.

I would still give it time and see how the overall yield manifests. I feel better about Win's comments who also had the same doctor.

[gillenator]

I think it was a Dr. Melvin Meyer that also was an MHR doctor in the Seattle and Portland area and I think he was with MHR when Dr. Niedbalski started with MHR.

You see, Bosley bought out MHR several years ago and not sure if Dr. Mel Meyer went with them or if he is now retired. From what I remember, Dr. Meyer was a good guy.

My impression of Dr. Niedbalski is that he is a professional, but I have not seen much of his work other than what is at his website.

[jetfan11]

Hair wasn't cut, but did use microscopes to dissect new grafts and make recipient holes.

I don't think new grafts will grow in as don't remember them even being there. I wasn't really looking for them but they didn't stay in very long.

My only hope is for shock loss of my previous grafts to grow in. Otherwise I'm screwed for life.

[jetfan11]

I know most of history.

My question is with a surgeon of his caliber what are chances he transected the follicles. Or maybe just having tough shock loss through 3.5 months.

Is transection done by only whe worst surgeons or can anyone outside the elite really screw up and damge follicles?

[gillenator]

I know most of history.

My question is with a surgeon of his caliber what are chances he transected the follicles. Or maybe just having tough shock loss through 3.5 months.

Is transection done by only whe worst surgeons or can anyone outside the elite really screw up and damge follicles?

It really depends on each individual doctor and how meticulous their approach is when grafting within an area that has exisitng hair. Again I think someone like Dr. Niedbalski would be conscious and aware of that risk. Just the fact that he is using scopes when MHR did not, is a good sign.

Does the name Dr. Mel Meyer sound familiar?