I had to look up willynilly.
You UK guys are weird
Kidding of course but it seems that anyone can buy these rotary drills and neograft machines .
The problem is a surgeon could be doing breast implants for the last 5 years then all of a sudden hes designing your hairline.
All you need is a doctor and two techs and you could set up shop anywhere
Cheers ,see your rubbing off on me.
I meant peace out

quote:

Kidding of course but it seems that anyone can buy these rotary drills and neograft machines .
The problem is a surgeon could be doing breast implants for the last 5 years then all of a sudden hes designing your hairline.
All you need is a doctor and two techs and you could set up shop anywhere

lol - Sorry for the UK slang.

The hairline via a boob doc could be a little too "curvey" - no doubt.

I hear ya though. Like i said (and we will most certainly hear from the doc i am sure) I am sure the tool will not be just sold to anyone.

quote:

Originally posted by spex:


I hear ya though. Like i said (and we will most certainly hear from the doc i am sure) I am sure the tool will not be just sold to anyone.

Lol as if they have to buy this tool.There are many so called superior tools for FUE...heck if they are serious about doing business they can even create one from scratch and advertise that they invented the best tool for FUE ever.I know of a greek clinic who invented such a tool and they were the talk of the forums years ago...

and another thing its hard for good doctors to adapt a tool from another doctor, that instantly means that the doctor who created it is superior to the one that bought it.

but in this case the tool is not something ground breaking if it cannot make obsolete strip procedures. We need a tool that a doctor will take and say thats it "no need for stripping patients i am not afraid of low yield and damaging the grafts because now its highely unlikely to happen with my super tool."lol

That will be the groundbreaking tool in my opinion, but what the heck every little helps...

If this can produce quality FUE sessions for most people in the neighborhood of ~1500 that's pretty key, and offers a tremendous amount of newfound opportunity and flexibility for people. My gut is that we'll get HM/cloning before a tool that makes FUE equal to strip; but, a tool like this makes FUE a much more powerful adjunct option.

My ideal is simply having the ability to harvest enough grafts to satisfy most people, even those who go onto NW6+ territory. This quasi-nullifies the dire need for HM/cloning -- though, we'll still be dealing with "perceived density" in some cases as opposed to the "true density" that HM/cloning would offer.

Being able to strip yourself out and then foray into FUE with a tool that maximizes your yield while increasing session size and making the venture much more feasible on a practical level is pretty sweet.

I do wonder if this would have any impact on forms of BHT...? I've always had high hopes for a tool to advance FUE while being able to sync up with reasonably quality BHT and really augment and boost our donors further.

tell you what Hopeful,
i've come to conclusion some time ago that this whole FUE thing is about commitment. i've read statements from many doctors that say fue is on par with strip in terms of its yield (granted you know what you're doin'). heck i can even quote Dr. F when he said recently that this tool produces 97% yield or that his fue patient yield should be no different just as if he had gone the strip route. see the problem is that doctors have gotten so used to "convenience" of a strip procedure and its low labor attribute for the most part that they just don't want to commit to fue 100% yet. as long as demand for strip is still there, heck why fix it when it's not broken, yet. if tables were turned and if it was the other way around and somehow this fue invention was much more convenient and easier labor-wise, i think we'd be all witnessing much more different HT industry today and a lot of us would be singing different tune. it all starts at the top and what doctors have to say. then simply it all rolls down the hill.

now don't get this post twisted and don't take it the wrong way guys, as it is just my genuine opinion about fue and why its breakthrough is being met with many hurdles along its path. i honestly do not want to start another fue vs. strip debate again as we have seen way too many of those in the past. it was just meant to be some food for thought for my man hopefull.

cheers ya'll and happy april fool's day

Your post GQ is one MAJOR reason I believe alot of clinics want no part of fue.
Think about it with strip a doctor is in the room 35% of the time and with fue probably 90%
Why stand when you can sit.
I think that only the doctors that have a true love for hair restoration and their potential patients will adopt fue.
Its rapidly evolving and theres no denying that.
If I was just starting to bald I would stay ahead of it by fue and low dose meds .
You could always do a strip later if your baldness rapidly increases .
If I was a doctor just starting out I would learn fue first. A monkey could do strip but it takes talent,dedication and patience for fue.
Im still a big believer in strip but not to offer both is sending a message that your in this short term.
Half the pms I get are about what fue docs to go to

right, and speaking hypotethicly if i were a brand new doctor to this hair restoration field this is how i'd deal with the "fatigue" issue. i'd make a partnership with another equally good as me doctor straight up (parhaps a friend from the same university). so when i get tired, my other half/MD takes over the extraction process or what not. plus i'm sure there are tons of loopholes in health system that techs can do it without a slap on the wrist from the medical board. we see planty of clinics do that right now as i'm typing this. now retraining them is a whole new ball game. FUE is 3X more expensive or even if it's twice the price of a strip procedure, i see a partnership thing perfectly profitable and viable option. and yes dedication to hair restoration from the heart is a key thing here. they say Rome was not built in one day.

oh yeah and i'd name my clinic: "HTs from the heart"

and then once i'm filthy rich i'd turn it into a hair mill and my Rome empire is back to square one.

There is one important correction that needs to be made here with respect to the amount of time the doctor is involved in the FUE process.

When performing manual FUE I found that it would take me one hour of exhausting effort to score around 350 graft with anywhere from a 70% to 90% success ratio.

With the new tool, however, I can do the same 350 scorings in about 25 minutes (sometimes less)with no appreciable fatigue.

Thereafter it's up to the team of technicians to "deliver" the grafts.

During the 1,000 graft FUE procedure I perfomed most recently I only worked a grand total of an hour during extractions and perhaps another 25 minutes making the recipient holes.

It's not really the amount of TIME that affects the doctors decision to perform FUE. MOST doctors are work-horses by nature, but rather the EFFORT required to obtain a cosmetically signficant number of grafts in a "realistic" time frame.

A big factor influencing a doctor's decision to perform FUE is the confidence he has in himself that he will actually be able to perform a quality and worthwhile surgery. With standard manual FUE tools this is not an easy thing to do, but with this motorized tool, and the proper method, success and confidence are much easier to attain- even for a novice. There is no question about this.

I was talking about manual fue and I do believe time and labor is a factor or all strip docs would plant grafts also.
If this is all you claim it to be then you sir have helped this field in a gigantic way .

Dr. Feller,

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. Best of luck to you! We really do appreciate the your openness and willingness to share.

Abe

Here is a picture of a Feller Punch that I posted on this site back in 2004. The same technology that went into the tip of this unique punch is identical to what is used in the new motorized FUE scoring tool.

Dr. Feller:

Is this new tool an option for safely removing ill-placed micro or minigrafts in a patient's hairline?

Too thin,
That is an excellent question and the answer is an unqualified YES.

One of the biggest problems with removing old grafts is that the scar tissue the body produces around it to hold it in tends to make it BRITTLE. Therefore, unless a fairly large size punch is used, the graft will fracture during removal leaving some of the root.

A punch like the one pictured above will allow for easier removal of the graft because it doesn't create as much friction when turned and therefore less chance of graft fracture.

Remember, HT is about maximimizing the ODDS of success. It will NOT get the graft out intact each and every time, no instrument can guarantee that, but this unique tool maximizes the chances of getting the old minigraft out INTACT compared to standard punches.

Not that the silence hasn't already been deafening on many fronts...but it's extra-comical (and telling) to see Dr. Feller's FUE breakthrough presented in unparalleled transparency, logic, and benefit to the patient while the Circus Troupe (you know who they are...) cloaks their power-tools *and* methodology in outrageous secrecy.

Thana,
You will also note that this thread now has over 1,500 viewings, no doubt some are from the clinics that shroud their technques in secrecy for reasons known only to themselves.

It's time to bring this procedure fully and completely out into the light and I've been in touch with several transparent FUE surgeons who feel the same way. By being honest and upfront about the advantages and disadvantages of FUE we can gain more credibility and thus grow the industry for the benefit of all.

It is my hope that even the "secret" FUE clinics will investigate this device and perhaps incorporate it into their own practices. If they decide to adopt this device I promise I won't tell anyone

I totally respect that you are one doctor who is not afraid to put their thoughts, ideas and advancements in front of the public eyes.
Your efforts are appreciated.

So if you are ever in need of a fresh scalp to use as a guinea pig for a new product or technique feel free to PM me.

Sadly enough I can't afford a proper transplant at this time but I do wish to donate my head to science and the benefit of others.

Thanks for the kudos, Bye. I believe in my ideas and have no problem sharing with the public what I plan to do and why. Hey, it's all going to come out sooner or later anyway. Besides, what's the point of a new idea or innovation if you can't share it with others who might benefit from it?

Very kind of you to offer your scalp to science while you're still using it. You should email some photos of yourself to info@fellermedical.com so I can see what I have to work with.

-Dr. F

Reply from the doc on another forum and thought info was appropriate here too:

Thanks for the comments.

There are many ways to skin a cat- my method, along with our new instrumentation, is just one of them. I am in no way impugning the good FUE skills and methods of other established FUE doctors. Rather, I am just offering up a new tool and method that may facilitate the FUE process for both amateur and expert alike.

FUE is a physically challenging procedure for a dedicated doctor and staff. Ironically, the more successful an FUE doctor becomes, the more he physically suffers as well- which is exactly why I invented this tool.

My new instrument is not being offered up as a “magic wand” for FUE. Nor will I allow it to be hyped as such. Like any new tool it takes practice and dedication to use proficiently. What I do strongly claim is that it will reduce the burden on both doctor and staff while at the same time speeding up the procedure-all without sacrificing quality.

For the novice it will shorten the amount of time and skill necessary to become a proficient FUE doctor.

Experienced and conscientious FUE doctors do not NEED to use this device. However, if they do decide to use it they will find out that they can still achieve the same high quality results- but with greater speed and less physical strain.

Advanced FUE Instruments, Inc., the licensee and owner of the technology, will have a booth at the upcoming ISHRS meeting in Amsterdam to answer the questions of any and all doctors interested in finding out more about this new device. Any doctor may call me at my office if they wish to speak before the meeting.

I did not build this tool to make a financial fortune. The market is simply too small for that, so it’s just not going to happen. I built it because it needed to be built and nobody else would do it. FUE is finding it’s niche, but in the realm of cosmetic surgery it’s still a “backwater” procedure-and it shouldn’t be.

I am thankful to Dr. Bisanga, Dr. Iter, Dr. Devroye, Dr. Feriduni, and several more whose names I’m forgetting for helping to bring FUE this far through their own methods and good work, but there needs to be MORE of us performing credible FUE. Much more. The only way to do this is by taking some of the burden off the doctor and putting it onto technology. This tool was designed to do just that- and it does. This opens the door for hundreds and perhaps thousands of more doctors to join the FUE ranks.

No established FUE doctor should see this tool as a threat. Just the opposite, they should see it as a long awaited instrument that will provide them with the well deserved respite they have long sought since performing their first FUE extraction. As for myself, I will NEVER go back to manual FUE ever again. I doubt any experienced FUE surgeon would either after using this tool.

Should we anticipate a reduction in the cost of FUE sessions with this new instrument?