yesterday I had my 6 month follow-up appt with Dr. Lorenz in Atlanta. Although I wont be going there for any more procedures, I took the opportunity (since I was in Atlanta) to have him comment on my progress. Here's what he said: - my growth is right where it should be for 6 months (actually 6.5 months). He said a recent study suggests that at 6 months a typical patient has realized only 80-82% of the hairs sprouting. - my scar is still quite pink, but he said that is typical and can take up to a year to completely heal. this sounds quite a bit longer than I thought. - patients can come in for additional procedures for more density in previously transplanted areas as early as 3 months post-op from the prior surgery. The risk of transection is minimal b/c the follicles will "push aside" when a new incision is made (as he put it....like putting your hand in a bucket of marbles.....they simply displace). - they shoot for 20-25 grafts (not hairs) per sq. cm. for the illusion of full coverage (when specifially asked, he said that is enough to block sunlight) - typically the average scalp contains 2.2 - 2.6 hairs per graft - a guy with my pattern of loss (diffuse, approaching NW6) will typically need 4000 grafts to get full coverage to the density listed above.
For the record I am happy with my progress and I think this particular Bosley doctor does quality work. I paid around $10,300 for 1906 grafts, which is expensive compared to some of the more reknowned doctors touted on this site. I will not be going back there b/c I feel I need more than 2000 FU in my next procedure and that is the max they can/will do. But more importantly, from what I have learned here, there are better practices with better prices out there.
i would be interested in hearing your comments about the points I listed above.
quote:- (patients can come in for additional procedures for more density in previously transplanted areas as early as 3 months post-op from the prior surgery.) The risk of transection is minimal b/c the follicles will "push aside" when a new incision is made (as he put it....like putting your hand in a bucket of marbles.....they simply displace).
This part does not sound right to me. The doctor is creating new recipient sites with a razor sharp instrument. It's going to cut into whatever is in it's path. A scalpel (or needle, whatever they use to make the sites) is not blunt like your hand. And your scalp is not like a bucket of marbles.
It is absolutely possible to damage grafts by transplanting into a recently grafted area. Whether the doctor can see the already-transplanted grafts (and avoid damaging them) at the 3 month mark probably depends on the patient (and the clinic).
To say that damaging grafts (or even natural pre-existing hair) is not a risk because "they get pushed aside", does not seem like a correct statement.
By the way, I'm not saying it's impossible to go in with an additional surgery at 3 months (although that seems too soon. But it is definitely possible to damage unseen grafts at that point, and that any follicles already in that area will not simply move out of the way.
how in the name of Elvis can someone have full popping of a previous HT at 3 months?...impossible...the surgeon would be "guessing" on possibly 90% of the locations of the previously placed grafts...if someone is doing this, they should be shot...
I swear, some of the crap that gets posted on this forum. Makes a guy want to reach through the internet, grab the poster and strangle him.
3 months between transplants? Not a chance. I've never heard of that and I've discussed it with dozens of surgeons. 6 months is always the minimum, most prefer 7-8 months between sessions to ensure that the previous grafts have indeed popped.
I think some people posting things misunderstand what their surgeons tell them and that complicates things, too.
Posts: 63 | Location: Chicago | Registered: March 14, 2004
no Ted, he was very clear on his '3 months' statement. The reason I posted these remarks was to get feedback on the comments he made. So, thanks for the feedback.
Arfy, I thought the "marble theory" was a bit of a stretch as well, but with no medical background, I don't prefess to know such things. The problem with him making a statement like that is, if it is untrue, many patients may take it as gospel b/c it came from a licensed doctor. I am glad I didn't go back in for round 2 after 3 months; I don't know if I had even 10% growth by then.
