Q: I am preparing for FUT surgery and read about scalp laxity exercises. Will they better prepare me for my hair transplant? – O.U.
A: For the majority of patients, there is enough scalp laxity so that exercises are unnecessary. If a patient’s scalp becomes too tight for FUT, we would switch to FUE. On occasion, after multiple FUT procedures, if the scalp is snug and FUT is still desirable, then scalp laxity exercises can be useful.
Posted byQ: Is it safe to implant 6,000 grafts in 2 days with an FUE procedure? — L.P. ~ Port Washington, N.Y.
A: A 6,000-graft procedure would be a very large hair transplant. Transplanting this many grafts at once would necessitate grafts being placed very close together. In this situation, the blood supply may not be adequate to support the growth of the newly transplanted grafts.
Another reason for concern is that when harvesting, FUE yields about 20 grafts/cm2. A 6,000-graft procedure would require 300 cm2. Since the donor area is about 30 cm long, this would require a donor height of 10 cm, clearly extending beyond the permanent zone of the scalp of most patients.
International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS)On March 6th, 2018 the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery announced an update to the terminology of the FUE hair transplant technique. FUE historically stood for Follicular Unit Extraction but has now been changed to Follicular Unit Excision. The change in terminology is intended to emphasize the surgical nature of the procedure.
In a Follicular Unit Excision (FUE), an “incision” is first made around each follicular unit with a punch mechanism that separates it from the surrounding tissue. The isolated units are then “extracted” from the scalp. Once removed from the donor area the follicular unit grafts are placed into the recipient region of the scalp. Thus, Follicular Unit “Excision” has two components, incision and extraction. The incision part of the procedure is what classifies FUE as a surgical procedure.
An ISHRS member survey conducted in 2017 shows that a total of 635,189 surgical hair restoration procedures were performed in 2016; this is a 60% increase from 2014. The survey stated that 92.5% of ISHRS members performing follicular unit excision (FUE) will allow the patients, when appropriate, to choose the type of procedure they prefer.
The International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS) is a global hair transplant non-profit organization with more than 1,200 members in 70 countries. Since its inception in 1993, the ISHRS has been dedicated to achieving excellence in patient outcomes by promoting the highest standard of patient care, medical ethics, and research in the hair restoration industry.
By Robert M. Bernstein, MD
When Dr. Rassman and I coined the term Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) in our 2002 publication “Follicular Unit Extraction: minimally invasive surgery for hair transplantation” we used the term to imply that this new procedure was less invasive than a traditional FUT/strip procedure ((Rassman WR, Bernstein RM, McClellan R, Jones R, et al. Follicular Unit Extraction: Minimally invasive surgery for hair transplantation. Dermatol Surg 2002; 28(8): 720-7.)), ((Bernstein RM, Rassman WR, Szaniawski W, Halperin A. Follicular Transplantation. Intl J Aesthetic Restorative Surgery 1995; 3: 119-32.)) Recently, FUE has been marketed by some practices as being non-surgical and this has given rise to the procedure being performed without physician participation (in some practices even without physician oversight).
The fact is that the FUE procedure is more than just the extraction of follicular unit grafts. The surgeon must first create an incision with a punch tool before the grafts can be extracted. The punch tool can be manually operated, automated or robotic. ((Bernstein RM. Integrating Robotic FUE into a hair transplant practice. Hair Transplant Forum Intl. 2012; 22(6): 228-229.)) The extraction can be performed with forceps or suction. This process of incising and then extracting grafts is a surgical procedure and is, therefore, better described by the word excision.
To avoid giving the erroneous impression that an FUE procedure is non-surgical, the term FUE will now be short-hand for Follicular Unit Excision. This better describes the two main components of an FUE procedure, incision (the separation of the follicular unit from the surrounding tissue) and extraction (the removal of the follicular unit from the scalp once it is separated).
OLD Terminology
FUE = Follicular Unit Extraction = the entire harvesting procedure
NEW Terminology
FUE = Follicular Unit Excision = incision (cutting) + extraction (removal)
It is important to note that this is just a change in terminology, not in the technique itself. The FUE procedure has not changed. The FUT/strip procedure and its nomenclature have also not changed. ((Bernstein RM, Rassman WR, Seager D, Shapiro R, et al. Standardizing the classification and description of follicular unit transplantation and mini-micrografting techniques. Dermatol Surg 1998; 24: 957-63.)) It is also important to understand that both FUE and FUT/strip refer to harvesting techniques and not to implantation of grafts into the recipient areas of the scalp (a process that is basically similar in both procedures).
Posted byQ: I have heard that shock loss can occur after a hair transplant. Do women experience less shock loss than men? — N.R. ~ Mineola, N.Y.
A: Actually, the risk of shock hair loss is usually greater in women than in men since women generally have a more diffuse pattern of thinning. This is because females often have more miniaturized hair, the hair that is most subject to post-op shedding.
Posted by
Dr. Bernstein creating recipient sites using the ARTAS robotHair transplant pioneer Dr. Robert M. Bernstein and his colleague Dr. William R. Rassman have received a patent on a new method that improves the outcome of Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) — the type of procedure used in half of all hair transplants performed world-wide. The key invention is the addition of a delay between the creation of recipient sites and the insertion of follicular units into those sites. The delay allows the healing process to commence before grafts are inserted, resulting in increased success of the transplant and an improved outcome.
Dr. Bernstein introduced the concept of “pre-making recipient sites” into medical literature in a 2012 publication in Hair Transplant Forum International, has discussed the idea extensively, and presented findings at the 2015 ISHRS Annual Scientific Meeting. However, this is the first time he has patented a hair restoration technique.
The first 24 hours after any wound to the skin is a critical period of time in the healing process. Dr. Bernstein describes this initial period in his 2012 publication:
During the first 24 hours following recipient wound creation, a flurry of biologic activities take place that facilitate healing. These include: the migration of platelets with subsequent release of cytokines, growth factors and pro-inflammatory proteins (histamine, serotonin, kinins, prostaglandins, etc.) that increase blood vessel permeability and stimulate cell migration. Allowing these processes to begin before implantation of the grafts should be beneficial to their healing and subsequent growth. ((Bernstein RM, Rassman WR. Pre-making recipient sites to increase graft survival in manual and robotic FUE procedures. Hair Transplant Forum Intl. 2012; 22(4): 128-130.))
By making recipient sites in advance of harvesting the grafts, three important things are achieved by the surgeon:
Dr. Bernstein proposed “pre-making” recipient sites in 2012 as a way to improve the Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) procedure, and robotic-assisted FUE (Robotic FUE) in particular. This is due to the fact that the positioning of the patient makes it problematic to create recipient sites and place grafts while follicular units are being extracted from the donor area. This is not the case in Follicular Unit Transplant (FUT) procedures, in which a donor strip is removed from the patient then dissected on a dissecting table. In FUT, recipient sites can be created and grafts can be placed concurrently with the dissection process.
“Pre-making” recipient sites is a protocol that should be followed during all FUE hair transplant procedures. It is also applicable in hair multiplication and hair regeneration techniques that are being studied as a way to provide an unlimited amount of donor hair for hair restoration purposes.
Posted byThe 2015 hair restoration practice census, published by the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS), showed that hair transplantation is an increasingly popular treatment for hair loss. The biennial survey found that 397,048 procedures were performed in 2014, an estimated increase of 28% over the previous survey, published in 2012. Three prior surveys found increases of up to 12%, so the rate of surgical hair restoration seems to be accelerating.
Since 2006, the number of procedures worldwide has increased 76%, with the estimated global hair restoration market now valued at approximately $2.5 billion annually.
Age
Over half of all men and women treated were younger than 50. Men aged 30-39 made up the biggest percentile at 31.7%, followed by those aged 40-49 (26.9%). It was the inverse for women, however, with those aged 40-49 making up the biggest percentile at 27.7%, followed by women in the 30-39 year old bracket (27.0%).
Gender
In 2014, 84.7% of surgical patients were men and the rest (15.3%) were women. The number of women receiving a hair transplant increased by 12% since 2012. There was also a 21% increase in non-surgical female patients.
Procedure
While Follicular Unit Transplant (FUT) procedures accounted for over half of all hair transplants, Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) is gaining rapidly, with a 51% increase over the 2012 results (from 32.2% in 2012 to 48.5% in 2014). See the chart:
Dr. Robert M. Bernstein, pioneer of modern hair transplant procedures and a Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York, was included in New York Magazine’s ‘Best Doctors’ issue for the 16th consecutive year.
New York, NY — Robert M. Bernstein, MD, MBA, FAAD, a Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York and renowned pioneer of Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and Robotic Follicular Unit Extraction (Robotic FUE) hair transplant procedures, was included in New York Magazine’s annual ‘Best Doctors’ issue for the sixteenth consecutive year.
On being chosen for his sixteenth consecutive ‘Best Doctors’ issue, Dr. Bernstein said: “I am honored to be considered among the best doctors in New York and it is a credit to the hardworking staff at Bernstein Medical that, after two decades of incredible progress, we are still making significant advances in the surgical treatment of hair loss.”
Recognition of Dr. Bernstein and his contributions to the field of surgical hair restoration comes as he continues to push the envelope with advances in Robotic FUE hair transplants, improving more traditional hair restoration techniques and exploring adjuvant treatments.
Among the improvements Dr. Bernstein has made to the robotic hair transplant procedure include: automated selection of follicular unit grafts, robotic creation of recipient sites, reducing wound size, and a “long-hair” FUE technique that allows a patient to have an FUE hair transplant without the donor area being visible in the post-op period. Collectively these improvements make the robot more efficient, reduce scarring from the procedure, and improve the outcome for patients. Dr. Bernstein’s internationally renowned hair restoration facility, Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, is a beta-testing site for Restoration Robotics, Inc., the company that produces the ARTAS® robot. Dr. Bernstein is a medical advisor to the company.
New York Magazine’s ‘Best Doctors’ issue is a special annual edition of the acclaimed magazine which contains a directory of the New York City area’s best physicians. The directory is created by Castle Connolly, Ltd., through a survey of doctors in the New York Tri-State area. To be included, doctors in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are nominated by their peers and then must pass a rigorous physician-led review of their qualifications, reputation, and skill in diagnosis and treating patients. Castle Connolly also publishes America’s Top Doctors, which has included Dr. Bernstein in all fourteen editions.
About Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D.
Dr. Robert M. Bernstein is a Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York, founder and lead surgeon at Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, and renowned pioneer of Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and Robotic Follicular Unit Extraction (Robotic FUE) hair transplant procedures. Dr. Bernstein was the first to describe Follicular Unit Transplantation and Follicular Unit Extraction in the medical literature, and his more than 60 medical publications have fundamentally transformed surgical hair restoration. Dr. Bernstein has received the Platinum Follicle Award, the highest honor in the field given by the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS), and has appeared as a hair restoration expert on many notable television programs and news and lifestyle publications over the years. Examples include: The Oprah Winfrey Show, The Dr. Oz Show, The Today Show, Good Morning America, ABC News, CBS News, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Men’s Health Magazine, and more. He is co-author of Hair Loss & Replacement for Dummies. Dr. Bernstein graduated with honors from Tulane University, received the degree of Doctor of Medicine at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of NJ, and did his training in Dermatology at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. Dr. Bernstein also holds an M.B.A. from Columbia University.
About Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration
Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, founded by Dr. Bernstein in 2005, is dedicated to the diagnosis and treatment of hair loss in men and women using the most advanced technologies. The state-of-the-art facility is located in midtown Manhattan, New York City and treats patients who visit from 58 countries and all 50 states. The board-certified physicians and highly-trained clinical assistants at Bernstein Medical take pride in providing the highest level of treatment and care for all patients. In 2011, Bernstein Medical became one of the first practices in the world to offer Robotic FUE hair transplant procedures using the image-guided, computer-driven technology of the ARTAS Robotic System. Bernstein Medical is a beta-testing site for this technology.
Posted byQ: How Many Hair Transplants Will I Need? — E.E., New York, N.Y.
A: The first session of a hair transplant should be designed as a stand-alone procedure with the following three goals:
Achieving all of these goals will allow the first procedure to stand on its own.
Because of this, many people feel one hair transplant is sufficient.
Reasons for Second Hair Transplant
While the first session of a hair transplant is designed to stand on its own, there are several reasons why one would want a second hair transplant, such as increasing the density in a previously transplanted area; refining the hairline created in the first transplant; focusing on increased crown coverage, when appropriate; or addressing further hair loss that’s occurred after the first transplant.
Because of this last reason, addressing further hair loss, careful patient evaluation and surgical planning is needed to take into account your donor reserve and the likely extent of any future balding in the planning of your first transplant session.
Wait at least 10 to 12 months Before Getting a Second Hair Transplant
If a second transplant is warranted, patients are advised to wait at least 10 to 12 months after the first transplant before considering a second. This is because over the course of the first year, the first transplanted hairs have grown in and the progressive increase in a hair’s diameter, texture and length can markedly change the look of the hair restoration — this may influence the way a patient wants to groom his/her hair, and only after the hair has reached styling length can the patient and physician make the best aesthetic judgments regarding the placement of additional grafts.
For patients having an FUT (strip) procedure, another reason to delay a second hair transplant session for this time period is that scalp laxity will continue to improve making the donor hair easier to harvest.
You can view our Hair Transplant Photos by the number of sessions each patient has had:
Posted byAfter years of jokes about his continually receding hairline, LeBron James, basketball superstar and winner of two NBA championships and four NBA Most Valuable Player Awards, stunned the sports world on September 16th, 2014 when he revealed a newly restored hairline while promoting his new LeBron 12 shoe at Nike World Headquarters.
Folks are now asking – where, when and how did LeBron get that great new hairline?
While no one knows for sure (and LeBron, so far, hasn’t said a word), Katie Nolan, the host of FoxSports.com’s No Filter, rejects the idea that LeBron’s new life in Cleveland is less stressful than it was in Miami and that’s what allowed his hairline to return. Instead, she strongly suspects that it is the result of an advanced surgical hair restoration technique called Follicular Unit Extraction, or FUE, which produces hair transplant outcomes that look completely natural.
She also suspects the use of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) which new research has shown to be an effective treatment for male and female pattern hair loss.
Katie Nolan breaks it all down for you in her No Filter segment below, “LeBron James unveils his new hair (and some shoes).”
Read about FUE Hair Transplants
View Before & After Photos of some of our hair transplant patients
Posted byDr. Bernstein was interviewed by Spencer Kobren on The Bald Truth, the critically acclaimed broadcast on hair loss and hair restoration. They discussed the latest in robotic hair transplant surgery, the ARTAS® Robotic System, FUE and FUT hair transplant procedures, and the future of hair restoration.
Spencer Kobren: It’s great to have you back. And I know you only have about a half an hour – actually about 20 minutes now… Let’s get straight to the point. You heard my opening, you kind of know how I feel about the way that the industry is moving, the direction the industry is moving in, and also my concern about now that these devices are really starting to become a bigger part of the market, I believe that these devices are getting into the wrong hands. Now let’s just start with why you’ve embraced it and then we can go into how the industry is evolving.
Dr. Bernstein: Follicular Unit Transplantation via strip was a pretty straight-forward procedure, and once we figured out how to use microscopes to dissect out the follicular units and train the staff on microscopic dissection, it was pretty much a slam dunk. It was just a question of other doctors embracing it and patients understanding what it is and demanding the procedure. With Follicular Unit Extraction it’s really a much different animal. The technique is very, very tricky. And the reason why it’s tricky is because the dissection is done essentially blind. The hair follicle changes direction as it goes deeper in the skin, and also the hairs that comprise a follicular unit splay outward — they fan outwards — so it’s very tricky to get a very small punch around an intact follicular unit. When you do this by hand thousands of times, it’s really, really hard for a physician to concentrate and be consistent and not get bored out of his mind. Also, you don’t have all the visual cues that you have under a microscope. So this repetitive procedure lends itself to robotics. For years we worked on the technique, first with a sharp punch, then a dull punch, then a two-step technique where we used a sharp punch to score the skin and then a deeper [duller] punch under it. Each got better and better, but it never was really consistent, and it certainly was very, very dependent on the user, the patient, and how you’re feeling that day. So this procedure lends itself to robotics. I first learned about the robotic procedure very early in 2011 and when I first saw the robot it made total sense to me.
The Bald Truth is America’s longest running self help radio show for men’s hair loss. Kobren is the Founder and President of the American Hair Loss Association and a founder of the International Alliance of Hair Restoration Surgeons (IAHRS).
Posted byQ: I’ve heard it takes the artistry of the surgeon to create a natural looking hair transplant. How do you do this with a robot? — S.S., Shanghai, China
A: I currently create the recipient sites by hand using different size needles. They determine the angle, direction and distribution of the grafts, and these three variables determine the aesthetic aspects of the hair transplant.
However, I am working with Restoration Robotics to have the ARTAS System create recipient sites and we are currently beta-testing this technology. The robot can now make very precise recipient sites. The ability of the robot to mimic the art of the surgeon is in the works, and we expect it to be ready in the fall of 2014.
In this new robotic-assisted process, the surgeon designs the hairline and delineates the area to be transplanted directly on the patient’s scalp. The surgeon then photographs the patient’s scalp and feeds the photograph into the robot’s computer to create a digital 3-D image. The doctor, in order to have the robot mimic what he would do by hand, can then manipulate various parameters, such as hair angle, direction and density.
Read more about Recipient Site Creation in a Robotic Hair Transplant
Posted byQ: At one time, I was told my donor area was not sufficient for an FUT hair transplant procedure. Does this also mean I’m not qualified for a FUE procedure either? — K.K., Houston, T.X.
A: Great question. You are not giving me quite enough information to answer your question specifically, so I will answer in more general terms. If your donor hair supply was not good enough to do FUT (i.e. you have too little donor hair and too much bald area to cover) then most likely you will not be a candidate for FUE either, since both procedures require, and use up, donor hair. That said, if don’t need that much donor hair, but the nature of your donor area is such that a linear FUT scar might be visible then FUE might be useful.
An example would be the case in which a person has limited hair loss in the front of his scalp, has relatively low donor density, and wants to keep his hair on the short sides. In this case, FUT would not be appropriate as you might see the line scar, but we might be able to harvest enough hair through FUE to make the procedure cosmetically worthwhile. Remember, with low density neither procedure will yield that much hair to be used in the recipient area.
Another example is an Asian whose hair emerges perpendicular from the scalp so that a line incision is difficult to hide, i.e. the hair will not lie naturally over it. A third example is where the patient’s scalp is very tight. In this case, the donor density might be adequate, but it would just be hard to access it using a strip FUT procedure. In this case, FUE would also be appropriate.
From these situations, one can see that the decision to perform FUE vs FUT, or even a hair transplant at all, can be quite nuanced and requires a careful evaluation by a hair restoration surgeon with expertise in both procedures.
Posted by
ARTAS Robotic System display monitor showing parameters for the creation of recipient sitesNew York, NY (PRWEB) — Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D., A.B.H.R.S., founder of Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, introduced new technology that allows the ARTAS Robotic System to accomplish a critical step in hair transplant surgery, the creation of recipient sites. Presenting at the 2nd ARTAS User Group Meeting, Dr. Bernstein previewed the recipient site creation technology that brings the robotic system one step closer to performing critical aspects of the labor-intensive, hair transplant procedure.
The ARTAS System is currently able to harvest intact follicular unit grafts from the permanent area in back of one’s scalp using precise robotic technology. This is the most difficult aspect of a follicular unit extraction hair transplant – the newer type of hair restoration procedure that avoids a linear scar in the back of the scalp. Now that site creation can also be done robotically, only one step remains – graft placement.
The ARTAS Robotic System maps the surgeon’s hairline design onto a 3-D model of the patient’s headFor the recipient site creation, the doctor first draws a hairline and other markings directly onto the patient’s scalp to delineate the surgical plan. Next, multiple photographs are taken and fed into software, called the ARTAS™ Hair Studio, which converts the images into a 3-D model of the actual patient. This computer model can be manipulated and saved for the patient’s procedure. Using the ARTAS™ Hair Studio software, the physician then specifies the angle, direction, density, and randomness of the recipient site incisions to create the most natural look. During the procedure, the robot uses image-guided technology to avoid existing hairs while it creates up to 1,500 recipient sites per hour. In performing recipient site creation, the robot automates a process that can be physically demanding and prone to human error.
On the advancement, Dr. Bernstein said:
“This development is a crucial step towards a robotic system that can perform every aspect of a hair transplant. A great deal of credit goes to the engineers of Restoration Robotics who have worked to make automated recipient site creation a reality. I am proud that this work not only improves hair transplants for patients, but adds to the increasingly important trend of using robotic technology in medicine.”
The site creation technology that Dr. Bernstein debuted at the ARTAS User Group Meeting; which was held in California (Laguna Niguel, CA) on February 7th and 8th, 2014; will be available to hair restoration physicians in the fall of 2014. Gabe Zingeratti Ph.D, head of R&D at Restoration Robotics, Inc., presented details of the technology, which was beta-tested at Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration. With the next generation ARTAS® Robotic System rolling out in the coming months, the focus of research will then be on the final phase of robotic hair transplantation, the robotic insertion of follicular unit grafts into recipient sites. This last step will take several more years to develop.
The ARTAS Robotic System, developed by Restoration Robotics, is currently in use by hair restoration physicians around the world to automate the extraction of grafts of skin and hair called follicular units.. Follicular units, which are natural groupings of one to four hair follicles, form the biological basis of the modern hair transplant procedure. Once extracted from the back of the patient’s scalp, the follicular unit grafts are then inserted into recipient sites in the balding area of the scalp where they grow hairs that are immune to the effects of common hair loss.
No stranger to innovative advances in hair transplant surgery, Dr. Bernstein introduced Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) to medical literature in a 1995 publication. FUT transformed hair transplants from the use of large grafts of skin and hair, known colloquially as “hair plugs,” to a more medically-oriented procedure that produces completely natural-appearing results. Dr. Bernstein with his colleague Dr. Bill Rassman again broke new ground with his 2002 publication that introduced the concept of Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) to scientific literature. Dr. Bernstein was the first physician on the East Coast of the United Sates, and one of the first in the world, to use the ARTAS System to perform FUE using the new robotic technology.
About Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D.
Dr. Robert M. Bernstein is a Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University and founder of Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration. His landmark scientific papers are considered seminal works in the field of hair transplant surgery. Other publications include textbook chapters on dermatologic surgery and books, like Hair Loss and Replacement for Dummies, aimed at the consumer audience. He has been selected as one of New York Magazine’s “Best Doctors” for fourteen consecutive years and has appeared as a hair loss and hair transplantation expert on The Oprah Winfrey Show, The Dr. Oz Show, Good Morning America, The Today Show, CBS News, Fox News, and The Discovery Channel. Dr. Bernstein has been interviewed or featured in articles in the New York Times, GQ Magazine, Men’s Health, Interview Magazine, Vogue, and others.
About Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration
Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, founded in 2005, is a state-of-the-art facility and international referral center for the treatment of hair loss that is located in midtown Manhattan, New York City. Hair transplant surgery, hair repair surgery, and eyebrow restoration are performed using Dr. Bernstein’s pioneering techniques of Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE).
Posted byQ: Is it true that hair transplants can now be done totally by a robot? — M.S., Los Angeles, California
A: The ARTAS Robotic System, developed by Restoration Robotics, is the most advanced technology for extracting grafts (the first and most difficult step in a Follicular Unit Extraction procedure), but it cannot yet do the entire hair transplant procedure, nor can it work without the supervision of the hair restoration surgeon.
Currently, the ARTAS System assists the surgeon in performing the first part of an FUE hair transplant (i.e., the extraction phase) with greater precision and consistency than can be done by hand. Engineers and researchers are currently developing the ARTAS to do the remainder of the procedure as well, i.e., making recipient sites in parts of the scalp that have lost hair and then implanting the harvested grafts into these sites.
The next step, recipient site creation, will be available in the latter half of 2014. Dr. Bernstein is already testing a beta version of this new technology. We anticipate that within two years, under the supervision of the surgeon, the ARTAS robot will be performing most of the FUE hair transplant procedure.
Posted by
Dr. Bernstein is credited with introducing the “follicular unit” to surgical hair restoration, the innovation that allowed for a “completely natural-looking hair transplant” to be achieved. The commentary on Dr. Bernstein’s contributions to the field of hair transplantation are outlined in an historical review of dermatologic surgery that appeared in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
Dr. Bernstein is noted as being responsible for moving the field of hair restoration surgery away from large graft “plugs” and mini-micrografts to follicular units:
The following year, dermatologists Bernstein et al laid down the conceptual framework for follicular unit transplantation in their 1995 article, “Follicular transplantation.” In 1997, they detailed its clinical application in the paired articles, “Follicular transplantation: patient evaluation and surgical planning” and “The aesthetics of follicular transplantation.”
The 2 advances, the application of the stereomicroscope to follicular dissection and the use of follicular units as the basic element of hair transplantation, arose from a background in dermatology. They moved the field of hair restoration surgery from plugs and mini-micrografting, where this basic anatomical feature of the hair follicle was ignored, to follicular unit transplantation, where the follicular unit became sacrosanct. These 2 ideas, when put to clinical use, allowed the once elusive goal of a completely natural-looking hair transplant to finally be achieved.
Dr. Bernstein’s pioneering of the Follicular Unit Transplant (FUT) procedure still resonates, almost two decades later, as the follicular unit continues to be the anatomical structure that is transplanted in hair transplant surgeries worldwide.
The article then describes how Dr. Bernstein, along with his colleague Dr. Rassman, laid the foundation for the next major developments in hair restoration; first with his description of the Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) technique and more recently with innovation in robotic hair restoration technology.
With the publication of the article, “Follicular unit extraction,” in 2002, the follicular unit extraction procedure gained popular appeal and was rapidly adopted by doctors worldwide. The authors cautioned on the limitations of this harvesting technique and the risk of follicular damage. Dermatologists Berman, Zering, and Bernstein, along with their colleagues in other specialties, continue to work on the problem of harvesting in follicular unit extraction, with the application of robotic technology showing particular promise.”
Taken together, these passages underscore how Dr. Bernstein’s research and medical publications have fundamentally transformed the field of hair restoration to the benefit of patients and physicians alike. While many other very talented physicians have had a substantial impact on hair restoration procedures ever since the hair transplant concept was first proposed by Dr. Norman Orentreich in the 1950s, Dr. Bernstein has contributed the key innovations that have made modern, natural-looking hair transplant surgery a medical and aesthetic possibility.
The article is titled, “Current status of surgery in dermatology.” The Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology is the official journal of The American Academy of Dermatology (AAD), the largest, most influential and most representative dermatology group in the United States.
Reference
C. William Hanke, Ronald L. Moy, Randall K. Roenigk, Henry H. Roenigk Jr., James M. Spencer, Emily P. Tierney, Cynthia L. Bartus, Robert M. Bernstein, Marc D. Brown, Mariano Busso, Alastair Carruthers, Jean Carruthers, Omar A. Ibrahimi, Arielle N.B. Kauvar, Kathryn M. Kent, Nils Krueger, Marina Landau, Aimee L. Leonard, Stephen H. Mandy, Thomas E. Rohrer, Neil S. Sadick, Luitgard G. Wiest, Current status of surgery in dermatology, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Volume 69, Issue 6, December 2013, Pages 972-1001, ISSN 0190-9622, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2013.04.067.
Read more about Dr. Bernstein’s history of innovation in hair transplant surgery
Read Dr. Bernstein’s landmark medical publications
Download and read ‘Current status of surgery in dermatology’ (pdf)
Posted by
The 21st Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery was held in San Francisco from October 13 through 26, 2013. The meeting covers the most important scientific and clinical advances in the field of surgical hair restoration.
As a member of the panel on “Difficult Cases,” that explored challenging and atypical medical conditions and their treatment, Dr. Bernstein presented the “Management of Frontal Fibrosing Alopecia.” This condition is a form of primary scarring hair loss. Dr. Bernstein chose to discuss this disease because it can be mistaken for common baldness; however, since the transplanted hair will be destroyed by the disease process, it is a contra-indication for hair transplantation. Since missing this diagnosis can lead to unnecessary and ineffectual surgery, an awareness of its signs and symptoms are important for every physician managing patients with hair loss.
On the panel on “Post Finasteride Syndrome,” Dr. Bernstein was part of a group that reviewed the latest studies on the efficacy and safety of finasteride in the treatment of androgenetic alopecia. They discussed possible adverse events including claims of persistent sexual dysfunction (Post Finasteride Syndrome) and concerns relating to prostate cancer. They also discussed the challenges that arise in caring for patients when scientific research and the mass media give conflicting information.
In the Symposium “Question the Expert,” Dr. Bernstein presented a case of Diffuse Un-patterned alopeica (DUPA). This condition was first detailed by Dr. Bernstein in his landmark paper “Follicular Transplantation: Patient Evaluation and Surgical Planning,” that was published in Dermatologic Surgery in 1997. DUPA is a form of androgenetic alopecia that presents as rapid generalized hair loss in young adults. Besides being a significant psychological burden for young men and women, its identification is extremely important since medical intervention can have a significant positive impact when instituted early. On the other hand, a misdiagnosis that leads to surgery can result in a failed hair transplant and donor scarring that may become visible over time.
Dr. Bernstein was also the Keynote Speaker for the ARTAS International Users Forum. His presentation, titled “Follicular Unit Extraction: Then and Now,” discussed the evolution of FUT, FUE and Robotic-FUE and how it relates to today’s hair restoration practice. Of particular significance was the natural progression of FUE instrumentation from hand-held manual tools to robotic assisted hair transplantation. Dr. Bernstein explained that in the future, robotic capabilities will not be limited to graft extraction, but eventually will perform each aspect of the transplant including recipient site creation, and graft placement. See “Dr. Bernstein Gives Keynote Presentation On Robotic Hair Transplantation” for more details on the presentation and some photographs of the event.
Posted byNew York Magazine’s 2013 ‘Best Doctors’ issue includes Dr. Robert M. Bernstein, a pioneer of modern hair transplant procedures, making this the 14th consecutive year Dr. Bernstein has appeared in the special annual issue.
New York, NY — Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D., Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York and a pioneer of modern hair transplant procedures, was included in the ‘Best Doctors’ issue of New York Magazine for the fourteenth consecutive year.
Dr. Bernstein earned his placement in the Best Doctors issue, and his reputation as world-renowned hair restoration physician, through a 20 year career of developing surgical techniques and adopting and guiding technological advances in the industry. His more than 60 medical publications on Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT), Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE), and Robotic FUE (R-FUE) have revolutionized the field of hair restoration and provide the foundation for hair transplant surgeons worldwide.
The New York Magazine ‘Best Doctors’ issue is an annual issue of the magazine that contains a directory of the New York area’s best physicians. The directory is based on the results of a peer-reviewed survey that is conducted by Castle Connolly, Ltd. The company also publishes the guidebook “Top Doctors: New York Metro Area,” based on the same survey of doctors. As part of the survey, physicians are nominated from across the New York metropolitan area including Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, The Bronx, Staten Island, Westchester County, Long Island, and counties in New Jersey and Connecticut. The recommendations are based on the nominated doctor’s qualifications, reputation, skill in diagnosis, skill in treating patients, and other criteria. A physician-led research team at Castle Connolly tabulates and vets the nominations and compiles the final list.
Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, the facility Dr. Bernstein founded in 2005, is a state-of-the-art hair loss treatment facility in New York City that serves men and women from around the world. The center specializes in FUT, FUE and R-FUE hair transplants, and also performs corrective hair transplants and offers medical treatments for hair loss patients who are not indicated for a transplant. In 2011, Bernstein Medical became the first hair restoration facility on the East Coast to offer Robotic FUE procedures using the ARTAS Robotic System. Dr. Bernstein has worked closely with Restoration Robotics, Inc. to improve both the robotic technology and the R-FUE procedure protocol.
Dr. Bernstein has appeared on many notable media programs and publications over the years. Some of these include: The Oprah Winfrey Show, The Dr. Oz Show, The Today Show, Good Morning America, ABC News, CBS News, The Early Show, Fox News, National Public Radio, NY1, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Men’s Health Magazine, GQ Magazine, Telemundo, “O” the Oprah Magazine, and more. He is co-author of Hair Loss & Replacement for Dummies and has received the Platinum Follicle Award, Surgeon of the Month, and Pioneer of the Month honors from the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery (ISHRS).
Posted byQ: I have seen through forums that a hair transplant gives severe shock loss in the donor zone (especially behind ears) after the surgery. Doctors say it is temporary and can last about six months or more. Frankly, do you believe in this? Will the donor shocked hair recover? — M.D., Darien, C.T.
A: It depends if you are speaking about follicular unit hair transplantation using strip harvesting (FUT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE). With FUT, it is extremely uncommon to have any shock hair loss in the donor area. This could occur if the hair transplant procedure was done improperly, i.e. the donor area was closed too tightly. In this case, some hair loss may be permanent. This is one of the reasons that very large hair transplant sessions are unwise. Shock hair loss in FUE is more common, but is generally not significant and should eventually recover completely.
That said, some shock hair loss in the recipient area is quite common with either hair restoration procedure (FUT or FUE). This is particularly the case if there is a lot of existing miniaturized hair (hair that is starting to thin) in the transplanted area.
Posted byQ: I heard that for someone who has had several strip procedures, the ARTAS robot for FUE does not work because it is programmed to work with “textbook male pattern baldness”, which I no longer have. I thought the scars from previous procedures, as well as the large amount of already transplanted hair, might throw off the robot’s programming (it wouldn’t quite know what to do). But if I am wrong about this then the robot may in fact be the best approach for me. Please advise. — N.C., Paris, France
A: When performing robotic hair transplants on patients with prior surgery, I program the robot to avoid scarred areas – just as we would do visually when performing manual FUE.
Posted byQ: I’ve noticed from the chatter on blogs, that it is not uncommon for men to go through multiple FUE procedures over 10+ year time-frame. It seems to be that after the initial FUE procedure to address moderate hair loss, the patient continues their natural balding to where they must undergo another FUE procedure in order to get back to their desired look. I’m almost 33 and while I take Propecia, my hair loss has been very gradual since I was about 26. I still have what many would consider a full head of hair, although very thin and with noticeable loss at my temples and crown. I’d always thought that a hair transplant would be a “1 and done” procedure, and now I’m concerned that if I do an FUE procedure now to replace what’s been already lost, I’ll just have to revisit a subsequent FUE down the line. Are ongoing FUEs simply part of the hair maintenance that a patient needs to accept about hair restoration process? — A.A., New Hyde Park, N.Y.
A: Your concerns are correct and would apply to any hair transplant procedure; FUT or FUE. That is why it is best not to begin hair restoration surgery too early.
Posted byQ: If I have no linear scar and I can exercise right away, why would you ever recommend FUT instead of FUE? — H.T., Dover, M.A.
A: I advise FUT because the grafts are of better quality (less transaction and more support tissue surrounding the follicle) and because more hair can be obtained from the mid-portion of the permanent zone –- which is where the hair is the best quality and most permanent. For the majority of patients a linear scar buried in the donor hair is not an issue. Each patient has to weigh the pros and cons of each procedure when making a decision.
Posted byQ: A while ago I saw you and you recommended FUT hair transplantation, but my friend came in and you recommended FUE. How come? — C.T., Hackensack, N.J.
A: I think that both procedures are excellent, which is why I do them both. My recommendations are determined by the individual patient. His or her age, desire to wear hair cut very short, athletic activities, donor density and miniaturization, extent of hair loss, and potential future balding are all important aspects in the decision process.
Posted byQ: Is the recovery time a lot longer with FUT compared to FUE? — C.W., Chicago, I.L.
A: Cosmetically, the recovery for FUT is actually shorter, since the back and sides do not need to be shaved and the longer hair can completely cover the donor incision immediately after the Follicular Unit Transplant procedure. In large Follicular Unit Extraction procedures, the entire back and sides of the scalp need to be clipped very close to the scalp. It can take up to 2 or 3 weeks for the hair to grow long enough to completely camouflage the harvested area. Once the healing is complete and any redness has subsided, the hair can be cut shorter.
For strenuous physical activity, however, the recovery is longer with FUT due to the linear incision. This is a major reason why professional athletes or very physically active people prefer FUE. However, many business professionals prefer FUT hair transplantation as there is significantly less down time from work (for the cosmetic reasons discussed above).
Posted byNew York, NY (PRWEB) — Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D., A.B.H.R.S., a world-renowned hair transplant surgeon, presented a series of improvements to hair transplant procedures which use the ARTAS Robotic System for Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE). These updates include revisions to the FUE surgical protocol and technical adjustments to the robotic extraction system. He presented his refinements at the first user meeting held by the developers of the system; Restoration Robotics, Inc.; on September 14 – 16 in Denver, Colorado.
Dr. Bernstein receives recognition from Restoration RoboticsDr. Bernstein described his series of improvements in a lecture to an elite group of physicians who are among the first adopters in the industry of the image-guided, robotic-assisted system. The updates are designed to improve the results of FUE hair transplantation by enhancing both the surgical protocols of the procedure as well as the functionality of the robotic system. In FUE, small groups of one to four hairs, called follicular units, are extracted individually from the back and sides of the scalp and are then implanted into recipient sites, which are tiny holes that the surgeon creates in a balding area of the scalp.
Dr. Bernstein discussing robotic-assisted FUE at Restoration Robotics’ first user meetingThe most important update to the FUE procedure that Dr. Bernstein proposed is for surgeons to create recipient sites before they extract the grafts, rather than create the sites after grafts are extracted. Drawing on his decades of experience in hair transplantation, Dr. Bernstein developed this technique of “pre-making” recipient sites in order to maximize survival of the grafts during the hair transplant. Using this technique, extracted grafts are outside the body for a shorter duration of time. It also minimizes instances of “popping,” in which grafts are exposed to desiccation (drying) and hypoxia (low oxygen) before they are inserted back into the scalp. By “pre-making” the recipient sites, these harmful factors are mitigated and a greater number of the grafts grow into viable, hair-producing follicular units. Dr. Bernstein encourages surgeons to use this technique on all FUE procedures, whether using manual methods or robotic instrumentation.
When asked to comment on his improvements to the robotic FUE procedure, Dr. Bernstein said:
“It was fortuitous timing that the ARTAS Robot became available just as I was developing my refinements to the FUE procedure. The combination of the automated robot for graft extraction with the technique of pre-making recipient sites has led to a significant improvement in hair transplant surgery.”
Dr. Bernstein is the founder of Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, and he is recognized world-wide for his innovative work in the treatment of hair loss. He is among the first hair transplant surgeons in North America to utilize the ARTAS Robot for FUE in his practice.
Being an early adopter of the advanced follicular unit extraction system has enabled him to work with Restoration Robotics to refine it to his exacting standards. Dr. Bernstein has, again, put his fingerprints on a revolutionary upgrade to the hair transplantation industry. He was the first to describe FUT and FUE procedures in the medical literature, in 1995 and 2002 respectively. In contrast to FUE, where follicular units are extracted individually, in FUT procedures a strip of skin is removed from the back of the scalp, it is then dissected into follicular units, and those follicular unit grafts are then implanted into recipient sites in the patient’s scalp.
About Dr. Bernstein
Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D., A.B.H.R.S. is a Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University and a pioneer in the field of hair restoration. His landmark scientific papers are considered seminal works in the field of hair transplant surgery, and he is the most widely published author on the topic having published more than sixty articles, editorial reviews, books, and textbook chapters.
Dr. Bernstein has been selected as one of New York Magazine’s “Best Doctor’s” for thirteen consecutive years and he has appeared as a hair loss and hair transplantation expert on The Oprah Winfrey Show, The Dr. Oz Show, Good Morning America, The Today Show, The Discovery Channel, CBS News, Fox News, and National Public Radio. Dr. Bernstein has been interviewed or featured in articles in GQ Magazine, Men’s Health, Interview Magazine, Vogue, the New York Times, and others.
About Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration
Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration is a state-of-the-art hair restoration facility and international referral center, located in midtown Manhattan, New York City. The center is dedicated to the diagnosis and treatment of hair loss in men and women. Hair transplant surgery, hair repair surgery, and eyebrow restoration are performed using Dr. Bernstein’s pioneering techniques of Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and robotic Follicular Unit Extraction (R-FUE).
Posted byQ: While I was lying awake last night your approach of making sites the day before implantation came to mind. It takes guts to have spearheaded that! I am not aware that that precedent has been set in hair transplant surgery. I would have been timid about infection; it’s a lot like closing a wound with a foreign body in it the next day. As with most things, I am a little slow to jump on board something new so I’m glad you’ve paved the way. Do you have any hesitance about this or do you have enough experience that you no longer hesitate? I would be concerned that variations of the local flora might make a difference and that, accordingly, a large sample size would be necessary to get comfortable. Glad for all of us that you are still blazing trails. — S.S., Shanghai, China
A: Thanks for your kind words. No hesitancy whatsoever. We find no increased risk. Think of it as if you did a hair transplant and ran out of grafts. The remaining sites don’t get infected, they just close up. In the process, all those chemotactic factors involved in the healing process move toward the wounds, so if a graft is placed into them, they would be less likely to get infected than a graft placed into a fresh (non-primed) wound, not more. It is like applying the surgical dressing Duoderm to a wound that helps it auto-sterilize. Putting the speculative science aside, we have not seen one single issue with it. Give it a try with an FUE or FUT procedure. Make the sites, have the patient takes his normal shower that night and you will be pleasantly surprised how little bleeding there is the next day and how easy it is to place the grafts.
Read a summary of the article on pre-making recipient sites
Read the full article as it was published in the Hair Transplant Forum International
Posted byRobotic FUE has improved Follicular Unit Extraction by automating what has been a labor intensive and often inexact manual procedure. It is the latest in a long line of improvements made to hair restoration procedures that lead to better results for hair transplant patients. Dr. Bernstein’s recent publication in Hair Transplant Forum International improves the FUE procedure even further, whether performing follicular unit extraction with the FUE robot or by hand.
In his article, Dr. Bernstein suggests two techniques to enhance the FUE procedure. First, he recommends that surgeons create recipient sites prior to extraction, in order to decrease the time grafts are in their holding solution outside the body. Second, he suggests adding time between site creation and graft harvesting and placement, to allow recipient site healing to progress.
Pre-Making Recipient Sites
As is discussed in the full article (which is available for viewing and download in our Medical Publications section), by making recipient sites first, the time grafts are out of the body will be reduced.FUE procedures lend themselves to easily reversing the normal hair transplant sequence of graft (strip) harvesting followed by dissection and site creation.
These “pre-made” recipient sites will also exhibit less bleeding than newly created sites and will exhibit the stickiness that makes older sites easier to place grafts into with less popping (a common source of graft injury). Besides allowing the placing step to proceed more quickly, pre-making sites will reduce the risk of mechanical injury inherent in repositioning elevated grafts.
After Site Creation, Add Delay between Graft Harvesting and Placement
While Dr. Bernstein acknowledges the expediency for the hair restoration physician, as well as the comfort of the patient in a single-day session, he suggests that, to facilitate growth after a transplant, multiple-day procedures should be considered in large hair transplant sessions that involve the placement of thousands of grafts.
In conclusion, these two modifications -— pre-making recipient sites and adding a delay before graft placement -— to the FUE procedure can potentially contribute to better growth due to easier, less traumatic graft insertion, a shortened time “out of body,” and the creation of a more fertile bed for the implanted grafts.
Posted byQ: I was told that I have low hair density in the donor area. Will multiple hair transplant procedures improve the results of my hair restoration? — J.G., Hoboken, NJ
A: Yes, but subsequent procedures would be smaller and there is a point of diminishing returns where additional procedures would yield so little hair that they would not be practical. There is a finite donor supply and once this is tapped, no more hair transplants are possible, regardless if one uses FUT or FUE.
Posted byQ: What are the chances of the donor scarring being visible long-term in FUT compared to FUE? — M.M., Altherton, C.A.
A: Both FUT and FUE produce donor scarring; FUT, in the form of a line and FUE in the shape of small, round dots. With FUT hair transplantation, the line is placed in the mid-portion of the permanent zone, whereas in FUE the dots are scattered all over the donor area.
If a patient becomes extensively bald (i.e. the donor fringe becomes very narrow), the line of FUT will generally still remain hidden, whereas the dots of FUE will be seen above the fringe of hair. In the less likely scenario of the donor hair actually thinning significantly, both the line (of FUT) and the dots (of FUE) may become visible.
Posted by
Dr. Bernstein was featured in a CBS News report on robotic hair transplantation. During Dr. Max Gomez’s visit to the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, Dr. Bernstein discusses with Dr. Gomez the difference between FUT and FUE hair transplants, how the robotic system works, and the benefits of extracting hair follicles using robotic FUE rather than by traditional hand-held methods.
Read a transcript of the piece:
Posted byCBS 2 News Anchor Chris Wragge: These days we’ve seen robots doing everything from vacuuming our floors to building cars. You may have even had surgery done with the help of a robot. But what about something personal and cosmetic like a hair transplant? Our Dr. Max Gomez tells us about a robot doing just that.
Dr. Max Gomez: Well that’s right Chris. Now first we should make clear that robots in medicine don’t act alone, at least not yet. They’re always under the direction of a doctor. Now, that said, what robots are really good at are tedious, repetitive tasks that need to be done quickly and accurately. Something like a hair transplant.
Dr. Gomez: A full head of hair is called a person’s “crowning glory”. Sure, going bald is a common fashion statement, but most people are like Sam.
Sam, Hair Transplant Patient: I wanted more hair on my head, obviously, and I didn’t want to be bothered with any of the other treatments that are available.
Dr. Gomez: For Sam that meant a hair transplant, where donor hair follicles are taken from the back of the head and transplanted to the thinning areas, usually on top or the former hairline.
Dr. Robert M. Bernstein: The hair on the back and sides of the scalp are not effected by the same genetic process that the hair on the top of the scalp is.
Dr. Gomez: That donor hair is typically taken from a strip of scalp that is cut out and then sutured closed, but that’s not the best choice for everyone.
Dr. Bernstein: Some patients, who want to wear their hair very short, that line can be a problem. Also, there are some people who are at risk of having a wider scar.
Dr. Gomez: The solution is to randomly extract individual follicular units, small groups of one to four hairs.
Dr. Bernstein: The procedure is very labor intensive and you have to do thousands of these in a single session.
Dr. Gomez: Enter the ARTAS robot. It’s a sophisticated hair mapping and extraction system. Once the donor area is identified, the robot maps all of the follicles, and then randomly extracts them with a series of punches. It can even tell the angle the hair is growing at to avoid damaging it.
Dr. Bernstein: It is much more precise than the human hand. It doesn’t tire if you’re doing thousands of grafts. It’s the same every single time.
Dr. Gomez: And here’s the result a few weeks later. Even with short hair, the random extraction means it’s virtually impossible to tell where the donor hairs came from.
Now, the rest of the transplant procedure is pretty much the same as without the robot. That’s where the art comes in. Deciding where, how many, how dense, and at what angle the donor hairs are inserted, that’s what makes a hair transplant look natural. And a well-done transplant is amazingly natural.
Dr. Robert M. Bernstein — pioneer of the follicular unit transplantation (FUT), follicular unit extraction (FUE), and Robotic FUE hair transplant procedures — was selected for the 13th consecutive year to be included in New York Magazine’s ‘Best Doctors’ issue.
New York, NY — Robert M. Bernstein, M.D., F.A.A.D., the world-renowned hair transplant physician, pioneer of the Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and founder of Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration, was included in New York Magazine’s ‘Best Doctors‘ issue for the thirteenth consecutive year.
When asked of his inclusion in this annual peer-reviewed list, Dr. Bernstein, a Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York City, said:
“It is such an honor to be recognized by New York Magazine. Our passion for providing the best hair loss treatments has served as the impetus for pushing the envelope in utilizing new state-of-the-art hair restoration techniques such as Robotic assisted hair transplants.”
New York Magazine’s Best Doctors issue is a directory of physicians that is compiled through a peer-review survey conducted by Castle Connolly Medical Ltd. The company also publishes “Top Doctors: New York Metro Area,” a guidebook based on the results of the same survey of doctors. Each year, physicians in the New York metropolitan area — including Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, The Bronx, Staten Island, Westchester County, Long Island, and counties in New Jersey and Connecticut — nominate their choice of the best doctors in a specific field. The physicians make their recommendations based on criteria including: qualifications, reputation, skill in diagnosis, and skill in treating patients.
Dr. Bernstein, a native New Yorker, has spent two decades developing new hair transplant techniques. His medical publications on FUT and FUE hair transplantation have revolutionized the field of hair restoration surgery and provide the basis for modern techniques used by hair transplant surgeons worldwide. Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration is a state-of-the-art hair restoration facility in New York City. Located in midtown Manhattan since 2005, the center is dedicated to the diagnosis and treatment of hair loss in men and women and specializes in both corrective hair transplants as well as the traditional restorative FUT and FUE techniques. Dr. Bernstein is the first hair transplant doctor on the East Coast to offer Robotic FUE hair transplantation to hair loss patients.
Dr. Bernstein has regularly appeared in notable media programs and publications over the years. Some highlights include: The Oprah Winfrey Show, The Dr. Oz Show, The Today Show, Good Morning America, CBS News, The Early Show, Fox News, National Public Radio, NY1, New York Times, Men’s Health Magazine, GQ Magazine, Telemundo, “O” the Oprah Magazine, and more. He is co-author of Hair Loss & Replacement for Dummies.
Posted byQ: I am so confused reading about FUT and FUE on all the blogs. Can you please tell me which is better, FUT or FUE? — M.T., East Brunswick, NJ
A: FUT (via strip) will give the best cosmetic results (more volume) since the grafts are of better quality (when using microscopic dissection, there is less transection and more surrounding tissue to protect the grafts) and better graft selection (the grafts can all be harvested from the mid-portion of the permanent zone).
In contrast, in FUE you need approximately 5 times the area. Because of this large donor area requirement, some of the hair must be harvested from fringe areas and thus the hair will be less stable genetically.
With subsequent FUT procedures we remove the first scar, so the patient only has one scar (albeit long). With subsequent FUE sessions we are adding additional scars, so over the long-term the cumulative scarring over large areas can present its own problems of visibility.
The main advantage of FUE is to have the option of wearing your hair very short (but not shaved). FUE is also appropriate for patients who are at risk for a widened donor scar (i.e., very athletic and muscular or with thin, tight scalps, etc.).
In my experience, Robotic Hair Transplantation is superior to other FUE methods in that it is much more accurate and more consistent. It enables the doctor to extract grafts with less damage than with hand-held instruments or other automated devices.
Posted by
Dr. Bernstein not only pioneers hair transplant procedures, but hair restoration technology as well. The NY1 television station, based in New York City, visited Bernstein Medical to see a demonstration and talk about the newest tool in the hair restoration toolkit, the ARTAS Robot for Hair Restoration.
The NY1 piece shows the robotic FUE system in action at Bernstein Medical, with views of the robotic arm, the image-guided system, the punch tool, and the user interface.
The segment also reports that Dr. Bernstein is among the first hair transplant physicians to use the technology:
Removing those units has always proved to be the toughest part of this method, but the robot changes that, which is why even Dr. Robert Bernstein — the man who’s widely credited with developing follicular unit transplantation and follicular unit extraction — jumped to be among the first in the U.S. to use the device.
Dr. Bernstein speaks to one of the main benefits of the robot, the increased efficiency in extracting follicular unit grafts.
NY1 serves 2.1 million people in the tri-state area, including all five boroughs — Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island, and The Bronx –– parts of Westchester and Hudson Valley, as well as cities and towns in Bergen County and Hudson County in New Jersey.
Read more about Robotic Hair Transplantation
Posted by
Dr. Bernstein was featured as the cover story of the April 27th edition of NY Japion, a weekly newspaper in the Japanese language, published in the New York tri-state area and distributed for free in the Japanese community.
The article includes an interview with Dr. Bernstein about the latest in hair transplant surgery, including his pioneering use of the ARTAS robot for FUE hair transplantation.
NY Japion featured Dr. Bernstein in a 2006 series on hair restoration in which Dr. Bernstein discussed hair loss and its implications.
Posted by
Dr. Bernstein spoke with Bloomberg’s Matt Miller about the future of hair transplantation in a segment called, “The Bald Economy: Surgical Solutions to Hair Loss.”
Here is an excerpt from the segment:
Bloomberg’s Matt Miller: Riding the wave into the future happens to be one of the pioneers of FUE, Dr. Robert Bernstein.
Dr. Bernstein: “The robot now allows a mechanized system to do [follicular unit extraction] very, very quickly and very consistently, so that the human error in this part of the procedure is now gone.”
Matt Miller: That’s right, a robot. Dr. Bernstein is piloting a high-tech solution called ARTAS.
Dr. Bernstein: “What it is very precise at doing is getting around the follicular unit to separate it from the tissue.”
Matt Miller: The procedure, which costs twice as much as the standard surgery, has one clear advantage.
Dr. Bernstein: “The difference is, in the back, in the area where we take the hair, there will be little tiny dots that just fade into the scalp.”
Read more about the ARTAS Robot for FUE and Robotic Hair Transplantation
Posted byQ: When was the ARTAS robot for FUE approved for use in hair transplantation? — J.B., Jersey City, NJ
A: Restoration Robotics’ ARTAS System for robotic follicular unit harvesting, received 510K clearance by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on April 14, 2011. The indication is for “harvesting hair follicles from the scalp in men diagnosed with androgenetic alopecia (male pattern hair loss) with black or brown straight hair.”
Read about robotic FUE hair transplantation
Posted byQ: What is Restoration Robotics? — L.N., East Brunswick, NJ
A: Restoration Robotics is a medical device company, based in Mountain View, California, that has developed a computerized instrument to assist in the graft extraction phase of follicular unit extraction (FUE) hair transplant procedures. Their patented device, called “ARTAS,” is an image-guided system for FUE. Their website is: www.restorationrobotics.com.
Read about robotic FUE hair transplantation
Posted byQ: I am considering having a hair transplant. Does my hair need to be cut? — I.S., New York, NY
A: In all hair transplant procedures, we are able to transplant into areas of existing hair without it having to be cut. The question of whether hair needs to be cut in the donor area depends upon the way the donor hair is obtained (harvested).
With a Follicular Unit Hair Transplant procedure using single strip harvesting method (FUT), only the strip of hair that is removed needs to be cut. When the procedure is finished, the hair above the incision lays down over the sutured area and it becomes undetectable.
In Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE), particularly in sessions over 600 grafts, large areas of the donor area must be clipped short (to about 1-2mm in length) in order to obtain enough donor hair.
View our page on the Pros & Cons of FUE hair transplantation
Posted byQ: I heard that there have been some new advances in hair cloning and that it may be available sooner than we thought. I was planning on doing a hair transplant soon. Considering that hair cloning may be available at some point in the future, should I do FUE or FUT, or wait for cloning? — K.R., Fort Lee, NJ
A: Although there has been a major development in hair cloning with the use of ACell, an extracellular matrix to simulate hair growth, the model, at this point, is still in its earliest stages of development. It is hard to know when the technology will reach a state where it can be useful in hair restoration.
With respect to which you should do FUE or FUT if, theoretically, cloning is around the corner, the answer would be FUT, since FUT will give you the fuller look.
If the goal is to eliminate any trace of the traditional hair transplant, again FUT will most likely be the best choice, since the single linear scar would be easy to camouflage with cloned hair. With FUE, this would be much more difficult, since there are literally thousands of tiny scars. However, neither FUE nor FUT will preclude a patient from fully benefiting from cloning if, and when, it becomes available.
Read more:
Posted byIn this paper, Dr. James Harris presents a blunt tip instrument to be used in a 3-step FUE hair transplant procedure. The instrument is described as a 1-mm dissecting punch that has a tapered blunt edge. After scoring the skin with a sharp punch, the dissecting punch is advanced to a depth of approximately 4-mm.
This instrument is similar to the one recently described by Bernstein and Rassman in New Instrumentation for Three-Step Follicular Unit Extraction, recently published in Hair Transplant forum International New Instrumentation. Dr. Bernstein’s instrument was, in turn, based upon ideas presented in a paper written by Dr. Harris in 2004.
Although Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) has potential advantages, such as faster surgical recovery, less postoperative discomfort, less noticeable scarring, and possible expansion of the hair transplant patient’s donor area, the acceptance of the technique is limited because it is technically demanding, has limited patient candidacy, and can potentially result in high rates of follicle transection. There are also problems of buried grafts, the inability to transplant large sessions at one time and inefficient use of the mid-portion of the donor area. The proposed methodology and instrumentation may allow more widespread use of the technique.
In the current study, using the SAFE System for surgical hair restoration, the average follicle transection rate was 6.14%, with a range of 1.7 to 15%. The only adverse reaction was the occurrence of two buried grafts, resulting in inflammatory subcutaneous cysts requiring excision.
Dr. Harris calls the procedure using this instrument, the SAFE (Surgically Advanced Follicular Extraction) System. Interestingly, in an editorial commentary by Dr. Walter Unger that follows this article, Dr. Unger suggests that the SAFE system should be more appropriately called the “SAFER technique,” since it is better than traditional 2-step FUE, but it has not eliminated the issue of follicular transection or some of the other problems of follicular extraction.
Harris JA. New Methodology and Instrumentation for Follicular Unit Extraction: Lower Follicle Transection Rates and Expanded Patient Candidacy. Dermatol Surg 2006; 32: 56-62
Posted byRobert M. Bernstein, M.D.
Associate Clinical Professor of Dermatology at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University in New York
Abstract of Dr. Bernstein’s presentation at the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery, 2005 – Sidney, Australia
Biography
Robert M. Bernstein, M.D. is Associate Clinical Professor of Dermatology at the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Columbia University in New York. His private practice in Manhattan and Fort Lee, NJ is devoted solely to hair restoration. Dr. Bernstein is the recipient of the 2001 Platinum Follicle Award for his pioneering work in Follicular Unit Hair Transplantation. Other contributions include studies in examining the power of graft sorting for density in hair transplant surgery, graft yield by method of production, local anesthetic use, suture materials and Follicular Unit Extraction.
Introduction
The addition of a blunt dissection step in the Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) procedure by Dr. Jim Harris has been a significant advance over the two-step technique proposed by Rassman and Bernstein. In this new three-step procedure, a sharp punch is used to score the epidermis and papillary dermis, and then a dull punch is used (through a twisting motion) to bluntly dissect the follicular unit graft from the surrounding reticular dermis. The third step, the extraction, is the same as in the two-step technique. One of the problems of FUE had been the relatively high follicular transaction in certain patients undergoing this hair restoration technique.
Rassman and Bernstein developed a simple test, the FOX test, to identify these patients in advance of the procedure, but this limited the number of patient who could undergo FUE. In addition, a significant amount of follicular transection occurred in some of those who were treated. The main advantage of the three-step technique is that it minimizes follicular transection – using the appropriate blunt instrument. The main disadvantages for this hair transplant technique are the logistics of the extra-step and the increased incidence of buried grafts.
Objective
The purpose of this study is to describe a simple instrument that can be used in the blunt dissection phase (second step) of the three-step Follicular Unit Extraction technique and to measure its effectiveness in a controlled study.
Materials and Methods
In patients undergoing hair transplantation, the hair in a 2×4 cm patch in the mid-portion of the donor area was clipped to approximately 1-mm in length and anesthetized. Ten follicular units were extracted from one half of the patch using two-step FUE and ten follicular units were extracted from the other half of the patch using the three-step technique. The two step technique was performed using a 1-mm Miltex punch and fine rat-tooth forceps. In the three step technique, a 1-mm Miltex punch was used to score the skin, a thin cylindrical stainless steel tube was used for the blunt dissection and then fine rat-tooth forceps were used for the extraction. The sides were alternated on different patients. After extraction, each graft was examined under a stereo-microscope and the following information was recorded: 1) hair characteristics; color, wave, and thickness, 2) anticipated yield – the number of hairs visible with the stereo-microscope on the surface of the extracted graft, 3) actual yield – the number of intact follicles in the follicular unit visible under the stereo-microscope. Intact hair yields and graft yields were calculated for the two techniques and compared.
Discussion and Results
In the two-step follicular unit extraction technique, proposed by Rassman and Bernstein, there was an attempt to “separate follicular units from the surrounding tissue down to the level of the mid dermis.” The rational was that because of the anatomic divergence of individual follicles as the follicular unit entered the fat, a punch that neatly encompassed a follicular unit on the surface would amputate the splayed bulbs as it cut through the deeper tissues and result in unacceptable rates of transection.
To circumvent the problem of “follicular unit splay,” they considered Inaba’s technique of removing hair from the donor area with a punch that was used to cut only part of the way down the follicle. The depth of the traditional punch (used in older hair transplant techniques) was difficult to control, however, and transection resulted in many cases. The FOX test was able to screen out the patients who were most likely to be subject to excessive transection and thus improve patient selection, but it did not improve the quality of the grafts.
The three-step FUE technique of Harris overcomes the limitation of the original technique, as the blunt tipped instrument is advanced into the dermis, splayed follicles are gathered together avoiding transection. In effect, Harris’ dull-punch technique allows a full realization of the “extraction concept.” One untoward result of the three-step technique is a possible higher incidence of buried grafts. It also adds an additional step to an already tedious hair restoration process.
There are many possible permutations of blunt instrument design. Possibly the most straightforward is to use a cylindrical instrument whose walls are thin enough to dissect though dermal connective tissue with a simple rotating movement, yet thick enough so that the advancing edge avoids follicular transection. The instrument design used in the current study will be presented. The current study confirms the advantage of the three-step procedure over the standard method of follicular unit extraction.
Conclusion
The three-step FUE technique proposed by Harris offers significant improvement over the two-step technique. The main advantage of the three-step technique for hair transplantation is that it minimizes follicular transection. The main disadvantages are the logistics of the extra-step and the increased incidence of buried grafts. A new type of blunt instrumentation is described in this study. The ideal tool design that will minimize both transection and the possibility of buried grafts still needs to be determined.
Posted byQ: What is Follicular Unit Transplantation and how is it different from Follicular Unit Extraction? — H.L., White Plains, NY
A: Follicular Unit Hair Transplantation, called FUT for short, is a procedure where hair is transplanted in the naturally occurring groups of one to four hair follicles. These individual groups of hair, or units, are dissected from a single donor strip using a stereo-microscope. The area where the donor strip was removed is sutured closed, generally leaving a thin, fine, line scar.
In Follicular Unit Extraction, or FUE, the individual units are removed directly from the back or sides of the scalp through a small round instrument called a punch. There is no linear scar. There is, however, scarring from the removal of each follicle. Although the scars of FUE are tiny and round, the total amount of scarring is actually more than in FUT.
In addition, since in FUE the bald skin around each follicular unit is not removed, the total amount of hair that can be removed in FUE is substantially less than in FUT. This is because if one were to remove all the hair in an area, it would be bald. In FUT, the intervening bald tissue is removed along with the follicles in the strip.
Posted byJames A. Harris, MD.
University of Colorado, Greenwood Village, CO, USA.
SUMMARY of Dr. Harris’ Abstract from his presentation at the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery, 2005 – Sidney, Australia
The SAFE System for FUE provided a novel methodology and new hair transplant instrumentation to increase graft production rates, decrease follicle transection rate, and expand patient candidacy for surgical hair restoration. However, the mechanism of the interaction of the blunt dissecting punch and the dermis produced follicular unit graft burial (approximately 7.2% of attempted extractions) that slowed the extraction process during the hair transplantation and resulted in inflammatory cysts requiring surgical excision in .02% of attempted graft extractions.
The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of a new dissecting tip that could potentially decrease the graft burial rate and increase the graft production rate in the hair restoration. In the study, three patients received a total of 422 grafts. The protocol utilized limited sharp dissection of the epidermis (using a 1-mm punch to a depth of approximately 1.3 mm) followed by the insertion of the specially modified dull dissecting tip to its full depth of 5 mm. The follicular units were then grasped with fine forceps and removed.
The grafts represented a possible total of 1207 follicles, with 48 follicles transected. This is a follicle transection rate of 4%. In this series of 422 extracted grafts, there were 4 buried grafts with three retrieved representing a graft burial rate of .9% and a non-retrieval rate of 0.2% of total graft extractions. This is an approximately 8-fold improvement when compared to the 7.2% burial rate and 1.4% non-retrieval rates of the previously described dull dissecting punch. Subjectively, the modified tip allows for a more rapid and smoother insertion process that enhances the dissection phase of the extraction.
The improvements to the dull dissecting tip have decreased the graft burial rate, increased the graft extraction rate by decreasing the need to search for buried grafts, and allowed for a more ergonomic extraction process while producing a nominal transection rate. This will lead to time and cost savings for the physician performing hair transplantation using follicular unit extraction and allow broader acceptance by physicians and increase the availability of this procedure for patients.
Posted by
