About Header Image

Q: 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

by J. F. Fotrell

Celebrities – especially the men – are getting comfortable with the idea of surgical hair restoration and we are seeing more famous men embracing the concept every day. The truth is that the majority of men will eventually lose hair, so this is nothing to be embarrassed about. But most men don’t have to depend on their appearance to pay their mortgage bill, or to ensure that their career continues. Celebrities find themselves in a unique position in this respect, especially when the world is watching them grow up or grow old.

Celebrity Hair Transplants - Kevin Costner

Celebrity hair loss is becoming an increasingly hot topic in the media. The continuing demands on celebrities to keep their good looks, seems to be of great interest to the tabloids. This is evidenced by the recent interest in the hairlines of stars like John Cleese, Mel Gibson, John Travolta, Kevin Costner, Dennis Miller, Tom Arnold, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, David Beckham and many others.

For example, a Google search for “Mel Gibson hair loss” has almost 50,000 entries. This attests to the amount of attention the media – and the public – are paying to celebrity hair restoration.

Many celebrities don’t mind their hair loss when it comes to their own personal life, but they realize that appearance is paramount in the entertainment industry. Celebs worry that their looks are important to the fans, and they seem to be right.

Celebrity Hair Transplants - Mel Gibson

Chat rooms and fan sites are abuzz with the hair lines of the stars, not to mention the TV, magazines and newspapers which seem to always know when to get a picture at the right (or the wrong) time.

Often celebrities have hair transplant surgery only to satisfy the demands of their careers. Soap Opera stars for instance, need those wonderfully youthful hairlines, something that would not be in such demand with the general aging public. The hair transplant design required by someone in this profession, however, might not be appropriate for the average person.

Celebrity Hair Transplants - John Travolta

As a result, actors sometimes need to make some compromises on long-term results in order to achieve short-term career goals.

In order to create the illusion that time has simply stood still for people in the public eye, secrecy is paramount. Cosmetic surgeons for the stars are very meticulous about maintaining privacy, and understanding the special needs of their celebrity patients.

“Though the public tends to perceive celebrities as temperamental and demanding, I have not found that to be the case. Celebrities recognize the importance of cosmetic surgery to their careers and are very pragmatic about having it done – for most it simply goes with their job.” says Robert M. Bernstein M.D., Clinical Professor of Dermatology at Columbia University in New York and founder of Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration in Manhattan.

Interest in celebrity hair transplants is not just reserved for film and TV stars, but for all kinds of professions in the public eye. Sports celebrities like Tom Brady, politicians, fashion designers, musicians, and now even top business executives recognize the importance of hair to their image.

Celebrity Hair Transplants - David Beckham

Busy celebrities often have their PR people or handlers try to discover what their treatment options may be, but often the proper research is not done. After all, PR people are influenced by the media just like the rest of us. The far better route is the more time consuming one, where academic credentials and hospital affiliations are checked and medical publications are reviewed. Without this level of research, the search for a hair transplant surgeon can lead to some pretty bad results.

According to Dr. Robert Bernstein of the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration in Manhattan, “Most Celebrities aren’t as concerned with how the process is done; they simply want it to be taken care of. One high profile patient of ours, however, was so curious about the process, that he actually left the surgical chair during his procedure so that he could watch how the graft dissection was done.”

In this very competitive society, youth and beauty are highly coveted bargaining chips.

Celebrity Hair Transplants - Matt Lauer

One without the other can seem to be a considerable handicap. However, in the world of the rich and famous, where ones livelihood depends on physical image the stakes are even higher.

Fortunately, with modern medical breakthroughs, the image that is conveyed by a full, healthy head of hair is something that can be achieved, even by people who are not so genetically fortunate.

View before & after hair transplant photos of our patients

Read about hair transplant procedures

Read about medical hair restoration

Posted by

Q: Dr. Bernstein, I think that you have established a great monument in the history of hair transplantation. Especially, your historical works about Follicular Unit Transplantation, which you published about 15 years ago, have contributed greatly to the spread of modern hair transplant technique in the whole world.

In the past days, there might have been many physicians who did not care much about the importance of the follicular unit and they have only cut the grafts to size. Now, every hair transplant physician believes the importance of follicular unit, and there is no one who cut the grafts to size ignoring each follicular unit.

However, there are some physicians who shout that a hair transplant procedure can be called FUT only when people use all single FU exclusively, and the procedure cannot be called FUT, if mixture of single FU and double FU are used in a session.

I would like to ask you, if you could accept the usage of combination of single FU and double FU under the name of FUT, as long as the grafts were cut according to each FU and intact FU are used throughout the procedure. Could you accept easing of the very strict definition of FUT, which you published about 15 years ago? Could you agree to use mixture of single FU and double FU under the name of FUT? — N.W., Huntington, N.Y.

A: Thank you for the kind words. In thinking about hair transplantation in general, it is important to consider that a hair restoration procedure spreads hair around and, as a result, the transplanted hair will be less dense than the person’s original hair. Therefore, one would never want grafts larger than the largest original follicular units or the results will not look natural. The artificially large grafts will stand out in relatively thin surroundings. If one were to try to fix this by transplanting the doubled FUs very close together (over one or more sessions) one risks running out of grafts for other areas of the scalp. In other words, you can’t fool mother nature.

For example, if a person has thin hair and has only 1-, 2- and 3-hair units occurring naturally in his scalp, then creating 4-hair grafts (by combining two 2’s or 1’s and 3’s) can result in an unnatural, tufted look. Doubling larger follicular units also necessitates larger wounds to receive the grafts which defeats one of the main advantages of FUT, namely to minimize recipient wounding.

That said, it is not unreasonable to place two 1-hair FUs in a single site (if there are extra 1s from the FU dissection) in order to increase density in an area and to eliminate an extra wound.) We do this for crown hair transplants when we are not doing a hairline and there is no need for 1-hair grafts. However, this is the exception.

Technically speaking, anything other than transplanting individual, naturally occurring follicular units is not FUT. However, a physician should make modifications to the procedure for the specific needs at hand. This is the art of medicine. By understanding and applying the underlying principles of Follicular Unit Transplantation, rather than being limited by its nomenclature, the physician will serve his patient best.

In addition to exploring Hair Restoration Answers to learn more about this topic, visit the Follicular Unit Transplant (FUT) section of our website and read detailed information about the hair transplant evaluation, the hair restoration procedure, follicular unit grafts, the donor area, and more.

Posted by

Q: What is the difference between the following ways of doing hair transplants: Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT), Ultra-refined FUHT, and Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE)? — N.D., Meatpacking, N.Y.

A: Please see the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration website as it explains Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) in detail.

In brief, with FUT, follicular units are obtained from the microscopic dissection of a donor strip that has been removed from the back of the scalp. In FUE, the doctor attempts to remove intact follicular units directly from the scalp via a small round instrument called a punch.

Ultra Refined FUHT (Follicular Unit Hair Transplantation) is term that Pat Hennessey uses on his Hair Transplant Network. It refers to using very tiny recipient sites, carefully dissected follicular unit grafts, and large hair transplant sessions in FUHT procedures.

Posted by

Q: Some surgeons are doing hair transplants using 5,000 to 6,000 grafts in a single surgery. Looking at the cases in your photo gallery, it seems like your hair transplants involve many fewer grafts per surgery. Do you do such large graft numbers in a single hair restoration procedure? — H.P., Cranston, R.I.

A: The goal in surgical hair restoration should be to achieve the best results using the least amount of donor hair (the patient’s permanent reserves) and not simply to transplant the most grafts in one session. In my opinion, although large sessions are very desirable, the recent obsession with extremely large numbers of grafts in one session is misplaced. The focus should be on results.

For example, I would prefer to have full growth with a properly placed 2,500 – 3,000 graft hair transplant session than partial growth in a 5,000 graft session. Of course, the 5,000 graft session will look fuller than 2,500 grafts but, in my experience, never twice as full, and never as full as two 2,500 graft sessions.

The ability to perform large sessions is possible because of the very small recipient sites needed in Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT). It is one of the main reasons that we developed this procedure in back in 1995. See the first paper on this subject: Follicular Transplantation.

However, like all good things, the technique loses some of its advantage when taken to extreme.

In “very” large sessions, the long duration of surgery, the increased time the grafts are outside the body, the increased amount of scalp wounding, risk of poor growth, wider donor scars, placing grafts where they are not needed, sub-dividing follicular units, and the decreased ability to plan for future hair loss, can all contribute to suboptimal results. These problems don’t always occur, but the larger the session, the greater the risk. Therefore, it is important to decide if one’s goal is simply to transplant the maximum amount of hair that is possible in one session, or to get the best long-term results from your hair restoration.

Follicular Unit Preservation

One of the most fundamental issues is that doctors using very large sessions are not always performing “Follicular Unit Transplantation” and, therefore, in these situations the patients will not achieve the full benefit of the FUT procedure. Although doctors who perform these very large sessions take the liberty of calling their surgery “Follicular Unit Transplantation,” in actuality it is not, since naturally occurring follicular units are not always kept whole. The procedure is defined as follows: “Follicular Unit Transplantation is a method of hair restoration surgery where hair is transplanted exclusively in its naturally occurring, individual follicular units.” (see Hair Transplant Classification)

By preserving follicular units, FUT maximizes the cosmetic impact of the surgery by using the full complement of 1 to 4-hairs contained in naturally occurring follicular units. A whole follicular unit will obviously contain more hair than a partial one and will give the most fullness. Keeping follicular units whole also insures maximal growth since a divided follicular unit loses its protective sheath and risks being damaged in the dissection.

It can sound impressive to claim that you performing very large hair transplants, but if the large numbers of grafts are a result dividing up follicular units, then the patient is being short-changed. The reason is that, although the number of grafts is increased, the total number of hairs transplanted is not. A 3-hair follicular unit that is split up into a 1-hair and 2-hair micro-graft will double the graft count, but not change the total number of hairs actually transplanted. In fact, due to the increased dissection, more fragile grafts, and all the other potential problems associated with very long hair transplant sessions, the total number of hairs that actually grow may be a lot less. Please look at the section “Limits to Large Hair Transplant Sessions” on the Graft Numbers page of the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration website for a more detailed explanation of how breaking up follicular units can affect graft counts.

Donor Scarring

Since there are around 90 follicular units per cm2 in the donor scalp, one needs a 1cm wide by 28cm long (11inch) incision to harvest 2,500 follicular units. A 5,000 follicular unit procedure, using this width, would need to be 22 inches long, but the maximum length one can harvest a strip in the average individual is 13 inches (the distance around the entire scalp from one temple to the other).

In order to harvest 5,000 grafts, one would need 5,000 / 90 FU/cm2 = 55.6cm2 of donor tissue. If one takes the full 13 inch strip (33cm), then it would need to be 1.85 cm wide (55.6cm2 / (33cm long) = 1.85cm wide) or 1.85/2.54= ¾ of an inch wide along its entire length. However, one must taper the ends of a strip this wide (you can’t suture closed a rectangle) and, in addition, you can’t take such a wide strip over the ears. When you do the math again, it turns out that for most of the incision, the width must be almost an inch wide, an incredibly large amount of tissue to be removed in one procedure.

This large incision obviously increases the risk of having a wide donor scar – probably the most undesirable complication of a hair transplant. Needless to say, very large graft counts are achieved by sub-dividing follicular units rather than exposing the patient to the risk of an excessively large donor incision.

Popping

There are other issues as well. Large sessions go hand-in-hand with very high graft densities, since you often need these densities to fit the grafts in a finite area. The closer grafts are placed together, the greater the degree of popping. Popping occurs when a graft that is placed in the skin causes an adjacent one to lift-up. When a graft pops (elevates above the surface of the skin) it tends to dry out and die. Some degree of popping is a normal part of most hair transplant procedures and can be easily controlled by a skilled surgical team, but when it is excessive it can pose a significant risk to graft survival.

The best way to decrease the risk of popping being a significant problem is to not push large sessions (and the associated very dense packing) to the limit. In a patient’s first hair restoration procedure, it is literally impossible to predict the likelihood of excessive popping and once a very large strip is harvested, or the recipient sites are created in a very large session, it may be too late to correct for this. In addition, popping can vary at different times during the procedure and in different parts of the scalp adding to the problem of anticipating its occurrence.

Even if the distribution of grafts is well planned from the outset, a very large first session may force the surgeon to place hair in less-than-optimal regions of the scalp when popping occurs. This is because the surgeon must distribute the grafts further apart and thus over a larger area to prevent popping.

Blood Flow

Particularly where there is long-standing hair loss, the blood flow to the scalp has decreased making the scalp unable to support a very large number of grafts. This is not the cause of the hair loss, but the result of a decreased need for blood when the follicles have disappeared. In addition, persons that have been bald for a long time often have more sun damage on their scalp, a second factor that significantly compromises the scalp’s blood supply and may compromise the follicles survival when too many grafts are placed in one session. As with popping, the extent of photo-damage, as seen when the scalp gets a dusky-purple color during the creating of recipient sites, often only becomes evident once the procedure is well under way.

In the healing process following the first hair transplant, much of the original blood supply returns and this makes the scalp able to support additional grafts (this is particularly true if one waits a minimum of 8-10 months between procedures). This is another reason why it is better to not to be too aggressive in a first session when there is long-standing baldness or significant photo damage and where the blood supply may be compromised.

Limited Donor Supply

Another issue that is overlooked in performing a very large first session is that the average person only has about 6,000 movable follicular units in the donor area. When 5,000 grafts are used for the 1st procedure there will be little left for subsequent sessions and limit the ability of the surgeon to increase density in areas such as the frontal forelock or transplant into new areas when there is additional hair loss.

Conclusion

There are many advantages of performing large hair transplants, including having a natural look after one procedure, minimizing the number of times the donor area is accessed, and accomplishing the patient’s goals as quickly as possible. However, one should be cautious not to achieve this at the expense of a wider donor scar, poor graft growth, or a compromised ability to plan for future hair loss.

Achieving very high graft numbers should never be accomplished by dividing up the naturally occurring follicular units into smaller groups, as this increases the risk to the grafts, extends the duration of surgery, increases the cost of the procedure (when charging by the graft) and results in an overall thinner look.

For further discussion see:

Posted by

Q: I went to a hair transplant doctor for a consultation for my hair loss and he said that it was not that important to use microscopes for hair transplants. I had heard that it was. What’s the deal? — V.F., Hell’s Kitchen, N.Y.

A: It is extremely important to use microscopes when performing hair transplants. It is the only way that follicular units, the naturally occurring groups of hair follicles, can be isolated from the donor tissue without damaging them.

Other techniques, such as magnifying loops and back-lighting are not as precise. Using microscopically dissected follicular units in hair transplants has been the main advance that has allowed doctors to move away from the older mini-micrografting hair restoration techniques to the current procedure that can produce totally natural results.

See the Graft Dissection page.

Posted by

Q I had a hair transplant 15 months ago at a well known clinic in Manhattan. There were about 1000 grafts transplanted in the front hair line. At this point I am upset with my results. My guess is that only about 50 new hairs have grown. My question is what would cause this to happen? It seems to me that the hair transplant took longer than expected and my grafts died before they were placed! Please help! — B.E., Ithaca, N.Y.

A There are many factors that can contribute to poor growth during the hair restoration process including grafts that are left out of the holding solution too long or kept under the microscope for a prolonged period of time where they dry out.

Grafts can be injured in the dissection process or can be traumatized during the placing – if they are grasped too tightly or manipulated too much.

If properly hydrated, grafts can survive outside the body for many hours, so this in itself is generally not a problem.

There is no way to really tell what the exact problem(s) may be without watching the entire hair restoration procedure, since so many steps are involved that can affect the survival of the grafts. All of these steps must be carefully controlled to insure optimal growth.

Posted by

Q: Why are strips used so much in a hair transplant when there is now Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE)? — E.N., Long Island, N.Y.

A: Strip harvesting is used in the majority of hair transplant procedures because it allows the surgeon the ability to perform hair transplant sessions using large numbers of grafts while minimizing injury to the patient’s hair follicles.

This is possible because once a strip is removed from the back of the scalp, the tissue can be placed under a stereomicroscope where dissection is accomplished using direct visualization of the follicular units. This allows the grafts to be dissected with minimal trauma.

This degree of accuracy is not possible with other hair restoration techniques, such as FUE, where the separation of follicular unit grafts from the surrounding tissue is accomplished “in vivo” (directly from the scalp).

Posted by

Q: Does dense packing hurt grafts? — P.L., Rye, NY

A: There is no absolute answer to this question. In a hair transplant, dense packing of grafts has a risk of decreasing yield if there is a significant amount of photo damage to the scalp (which alters the blood supply) and if there is a tendency for the grafts to pop (this is difficult to predict pre-operatively). Very closely spaced grafts exacerbate the popping and expose the grafts to desiccation (drying), hypoxia (lack of oxygen) and mechanical trauma from the necessary re-insertion.

That said, the skill of the hair transplant surgeon and placing team, the size of the recipient sites, and the way the grafts are dissected and trimmed all play important roles in determining graft survival in dense packing.

Read a thorough analysis of the “pros” and “cons” of large hair transplant sessions
Read answers to more questions on dense packing of grafts

Posted by



Browse Hair Restoration Answers by topic:








212-826-2400
Scroll to Top

Learn more about hair restoration

Hair loss has a variety of causes. Diagnosis and treatment is best determined by a board-certified dermatologist. We offer both in-person and online photo consults.

Provide your email to learn more.