Aragorn

Partono i trials per la SIT. ___________________________________________ S.I.T.- Scalp Impregnation Therapy Another DrC invention being tested now in volunteer-patient trials in the Itzan Labs, is the promising S.I.T. technology (scalp impregnation therapy). S.I.T. is a proprietary new hair restoration technology where through a very complex and ingenious follicular-papilla manipulation and concentration, we have been able to auto-impregnate a bald dermis area of a volunteer with viable clusters, and observe successful hair growth. This breakthrough technology may very well render hair transplantation as a non-favorite option (in selected cases) in a few years if successful improvements can be made to address the actual inconveniences. We are scheduling the launching of the next phase, a much wider protocol to fine tune this lengthy, delicate and highly complex procedure. Scalp impregnation came as an idea for hair restoration as Dr.Bazan was working in his lab attempting allogenic melanocyte impregnation for vitiligo patients. Scalp impregnation may be in a near future an interesting resource for some selected types of non-scarring alopecias. Originally developed for "crown" / "vertex" areas is now being tested for facial hair (beard), eyelashes, and frontal scalp hair. Scalp Impregantion Therapy © is a proprietary technique from Dr. Carl Bazan (Mexico). Volunteers for the next trial can be enrolled starting late August 2003. A limited number of application will be taken. A reduced fee of US$5,000 per patient has been set to help fund the ongoing project. Those volunteers will receive about 1.5 oz of autologous SIT, and will be given special considerations for being enrolled on the Treatment Roll for definitive impregnation when the technique becomes fully commercial. It is estimated that a 3 oz SIT preparation + 15 day hotel stay + complete surgical fees will be around US$28,000 if everything continues according to schedule. There is a list of 36 SIT patients (from many different countries and walks of life) that have advanced their commercial fees in order to Fund the project (and be first to recieve treatment). It is yet unlikely (as our initial protocols describe now, that male patients under 30 will be accepted for SIT. It is estimated now, that in the future we will be able to impregante one or two patients (commercially) per week, unless more facilities are able to open and offer this therapy. ____________________________________________

Ovvero 4.617 euro diviso 1648 = 2,8 euro per u.f. oppure stimando una media di due capelli per graft diciamo 1,4 euro per capello. Secondo me hai ottenuto un ottimo prezzo. Come volevasi dimostrare, si paga meno negli US per un signor trapianto che in Italia per farsi macellare. Scommetto che da ***** TERMINE CENSURATO PER PROBLEMI LEGALI ***** hai speso di più. <img src=images/smiles/converted/wink.gif> Ciao

Inutile discutere chi sia il migliore, state parlando entrambi di primissime scelte. L'unica cosa che posso condividere con Garcia e che mi ha confermato Jones, è che la lateral slit consente una maggiore facilità di gestione dell'UDP (Ultra Dense Packing). Comunque ne possiamo discutere. Per Garcia, sarebbe utile per i nostri amici del forum sapere costi dell'intervento e della logistica (volo, albergo) e le u.f. trapiantate. xxxxx, state dando un ottimo servizio informativo, vedrete che oltre a risolvere il vostro problema convincerete molti xxxxx a non farsi rovinare dai "soliti" incompetenti. Le migliori fortune ad entrambi e grazie.

Da investigare.... ___________________________________________ New Product Information August 14, 2003 Lion Launches a Brand New Hair-Nourishment Treatment, Mouhatsuryoku Innovate The new product not only delivers hair growth energy to the hair root but also increases the presence of hair growth promoting signals, a path-breaking method in the mechanisms behind hair growth. Lion Corporation today announced plans to begin sales on October 1, 2003 of a revolutionary new product in its Mouhatsuryoku hair-nourishment treatment line: Mouhatsuryoku Innovate. The new product combines the constituent "cytopurine," which increases the presence of "hair growth promoting signals," and "glyceryl pentadecanoate," which delivers energy essential for hair growth, and will thus achieve the groundbreaking dual function of amplifying hair growth promoting signals and delivering "hair growth energy" simultaneously. It will enhance the environment for hair growth, stimulate hair growth, and provide for strong, healthy hair that is less prone to falling out—all at the same time. 1. Research & development in hair-nourishing treatments Up till now most of the efforts in research and development into hair-nourishing treatments have focused on energy metabolism improvement, nutritional supplements, and blood flow promoters in order to promote the growth of hair. However, the exact operative mechanisms that lie behind the onset of androgenic alopecia syndrome, or male pattern baldness, still remain a mystery, and the development of a genuine hair-nourishing treatment that deals with this disorder is anxiously awaited by everyone who suffers from it. It was with this situation in mind that Lion Corporation started to conduct intensive research into hair growth at the DNA-level, an area that was still relatively unexplored. By conducting a thoroughgoing genetic expression analysis (DNA array analysis) of alopecia skin from androgenic alopecia patients and normal skin from non-alopecia patients, Lion Corporation was first in the world to discover that there are anomalies in the expression of genes existing in the two cell types. Lion was also first in the world to verify a relation between androgenic alopecia and a decline in gene expression of hair growth promotion signals (BMP, ephrin). These research findings were announced at the 26th Annual Meeting of the Japan Society for Biomedical Gerontology held from June 18 to June 20, 2003, where they became a topic of wide discussion. 2. Objective of introducing this new product It has been estimated that the number of people who suffer from androgenic alopecia syndrome in Japan is as high as ten million people. According to a survey conducted by Lion Corporation in 2003, roughly 60% of men in the 20 to 50 age range are troubled by hair loss. The causes of hair loss are said to include such things as hereditary and genetic factors, stress, and irregular lifestyle habits. The survey showed that the number of people using hair-nourishing treatments in order to prevent hair loss increases with each generation. It also showed that what most people hope for from a hair-nourishing treatment is that it will "combat hair thinning," and also that it will "increase the amount of their hair, even if that hair is very fine." It was bearing in mind the results of this survey that Lion Corporation decided to focus its attention in hair growth R&D on a product that would utilize two mechanisms simultaneously. These mechanisms were 1) amplifying the presence of hair growth promoting signals; and 2) using the unique methods already developed by Lion Corporation for delivering hair growth energy to the hair root. The new product, Mouhatsuryoku Innovate, will comprise constituents designed to cover each mechanism. These constituents are "cytopurine," which amplifies hair growth promoting signals and enhances hair growth environment; and "glyceryl pentadecanoate," which delivers the energy essential to promote hair growth. The product will go on sale in stores nationwide from October 1, 2003. Lion Corporation has continued to come up with groundbreaking products in the field of hair nourishment, using its own uniquely developed technology and know-how, ever since the first launch of its hair products, in 1986. The company aims to use this fall's launch of Mouhatsuryoku Innovate, a breakthrough in the hair nourishment market that utilizes a major discovery in hair science, as a springboard for even further developments in the future. 3. Product features (1) Mouhatsuryoku Innovate is a revolutionary new hair product that promotes hair growth by increasing the presence of "hair growth promoting signals," thereby enhancing the hair growth environment so that hair grows in more thickly and becomes less prone to fall out; and boosts "hair growth energy," thereby reactivating the hair root and promoting new growth. How Mouhatsuryoku Innovate works a) Cytopurine (6-benzyl aminopurine) increases the presence of hair growth promoting signals, and interrupts hair depilation signals. Cytopurine (an active ingredient) is a hair growth environment enhancer that reactivates diminished hair follicles. Cytopurine interrupts the depilation signals put forth from the dermal papilla cells at the root of a strand of hair, and increases the presence of hair growth promoting signals, thereby providing a hair growth environment that reduces hair loss and makes hair grow in more thickly. b) Glyceryl pentadecanoate (PDG) provides hair growth energy. By delivering powerful hair growth energy to the hair matrix cell, it reactivates the hair root and encourages hair growth. Glyceryl pentadecanoate (an active ingredient) (see also Reference below) is an original product developed by Lion Corporation that delivers hair growth energy. By providing powerful hair growth energy to the hair matrix cell that constitutes the base of the hair strand, without the influence of androgens, it encourages hair growth through reactivation of the hair root. c) Blood flow promoters (Vitamin E derivatives ) improve the blood flow to the hair root, enabling a rich supply of the nutrients necessary for the healthy growth of hair. (2) The product comes with a "cushion nozzle" that allows the product to be applied directly to the scalp without pain or discomfort. (3) The product is fragrance-free. Reference Hair growth and depilation Healthy hair growth Healthy hair grows through the proliferation of hair matrix cells that constitute the base of the strand of hair, encouraged by "hair growth promoting signals" issued from the dermal hair papilla. The life of a hair, and hair depilation In general the life of a hair is said to be between two and seven years. However, the influence of male hormones, or androgens, causes the dermal hair papilla to issue "depilation signals" and also to decrease hair growth promoting signals, all of which interrupts the proliferation of hair matrix cells. The result is a shortening of the life of the hair, which subsequently grows through thin and short, and falls out more easily. http://www.lion.co.jp/en/press/html/2003033f.htm ____________________________________________ Ciao

Provo a risponderti anche se a distanza non è facile. A mio avviso è molto probabile che l'aumento di peso e il calo di pressione siano dovuti ad un eccessivo assorbimento del minox a livello sistemico (se leggi gli effetti collaterali possibili, trovi entrambi in cima alla lista). Per quanto riguarda la sfera sessuale, è risaputo che la finasteride agisce soprattutto sull'erezione e sulla consistenza dello sperma. Se fossi in te limiterei/sospenderei il minoxidil, magari utilizzandolo a giorni alterni, finquando la situazione non si normalizza. Inoltre fai la massima attenzione a non utilizzarlo con la cute bagnata, in questo modo si accentuano solo gli effetti collaterali. Se hai problemi di questo genere, puoi alternare il minoxidil con un soppressore del DHT a livello locale tipo lo spironolattone, progesterone o al più soft acido azelaico. In bocca al lupo, e fatti vedere dal tuo medico per una visita di controllo (pressione, sangue, etc.) Ciao

Non avevo dubbi che la posizione di Shapiro sulla FUE fosse assolutamente onesta, sottolineandone i pro e i contro. Il dott. Rose pensa che Ron proporrà la FUE come complemento alla strip a partire dal prossimo anno. Una domanda per Gekko e co.: Shapiro utilizza i needles per il trapianto nella zona ricevente, oppure i lateral slits? Grazie e in bocca al lupo

Non male, può dare un'idea dei risultati in base al numero di u.f. trapiantate e all'area interessata. http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=12&topic_id=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full://http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/ dcboar...=6743&mode=full

Informatevi se in Italia opererà personalmente Alvi oppure Francesco Muti, che fa parte della sua equipe, è italiano e si è laureato a Roma. Ricordatevi che la FUE è una tecnica che può dare risultati diversi in relazione alla qualità del chirurgo, quindi la massima attenzione. Ciao

Molto lungo ma interessante. __________________________________________ FIT began in earnest the summer of 2002. For many years Dr. Cole and Dr. Rose had heard of the woods technique. The earliest revelations on this technique evolved from Dr. Russell Knudsen, MBBS, Dr. Richard Sheill, MBBS, and Dr. Jennifer Martinik, MBBS. All three had performed hair transplant surgery in Australia for a number of years. During that time they were exposed to the work of Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell. Their initial impressions of this procedure and of Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell were not overwhelmingly positive. These disclosures helped to keep the procedure in the closet for a prolonged period of time. Indeed some of the donor area slides, especially those of Dr. Jennifer Martinik, MBBS showed significant scarring that did not reflect well on Dr. Ray Woods, MBBS or Dr. Angela Campbell, MBBS. Dr. Bob Limmer, MD proposed several convincing arguments against the procedure, as well. The primary reasons against this procedure included a risk to adjacent follicles, increase surgical margins, risk of transection, and excessive donor scarring that might affect future donor harvests. On paper all these arguments appear rationale, but in reality none of them is accurate. The only unknowns remain the limitations on the total donor reserves. Will they be the same, greater, or less? Rationale logic suggests they will be greater with a virtually undetectable donor scar and with minimal collateral damage. The primary advocate for this new technology for ourselves and perhaps Dr. Robert Jones, MD, as well, was Spencer Kobren. While Farrell Mann may have been the primary catylyst amongst the lay public and for Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell, Spencer Kobren and the bald truth probably had more to do with the entrance of Robert Jones, MD and John Cole, MD into follicular extraction and follicular isolation technique (FUE and FIT respectively). Dr. Jones had lived a relatively unknown life as a hair transplant surgeon and recently touted himself as a hair transplant surgeon and laser surgeon rather than a full time hair transplant surgeon. Dr. Jones reportedly contacted Spencer Kobren about becoming a recommended physician by the international alliance of hair restoration surgery and the bald truth. Spencer had never heard of Dr. Robert Jones, MD. Spencer advised Dr. Robert Jones to take a look at the work done by Dr. Ray Woods, MD. He said this new technique might give Dr. Robert Jones more notoriety until Dr. Robert Jones could show more examples of high quality work and gain a more authoritative recommendation. Dr. Robert Jones seized this opportunity and told Spencer Kobren that he had success with the procedure. Soon there after Farrell Mann's relationship began to deteriorate with Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell so Farrell Mann began to promote Dr. Robert Jones. Spencer Kobren informed Dr. John Cole, MD of the success Dr. Robert Jones was having with the new technique. Now that more than one physician appeared to be having success with the procedure, Dr. John Cole, MD began a more in depth evaluation of the procedure. Therefore, one could say that Spencer Kobren was more important for the promulgation of the FIT and FUE than Farrrell Mann although Farrell Mann has done far more to individually promote Dr. Robert Jones, Dr. Ray Woods, and Dr. Angela Campbell. In other words, Farrell Mann has been more of an individual promoter while Spencer Kobren has done more to promote the procedure as a whole. At the same time Dr. William Rassman, MD was promoting follicular unit extraction or FUE itself. Dr. William Rassman, MD and Dr. Robert Bernstein, MD advanced the science of this procedure itself although their individual success rate was not as high and their goal to supplant strip harvesting with follicular isolation technique, FIT, or follicular unit extraction, FUE, remains in question. Dr. William Rassman, MD and Dr. Robert Bernstein, MD practiced their version of FUE or follicular unit extraction for about 1 ½ year before they presented their technique to the world. This created a degree of mystic but did little to promote the surgery itself. They also tended to lure individuals in for the FOX test only to tell them they were FOX negative. This was generally followed by an attempt to convert the patient to a strip harvest. Obviously, this did not help to advance the technique. Spencer Kobren then told Dr. John Cole MD of an individual patient, whose internet handle is "timetested". Timetested had approached Spencer Kobren in search of a means to revise his previous unsatisfactory hair transplant results. Spencer Kobren had referred timetested to numerous outstanding physicians. Each physician evaluated timetested but could not arrive at a satisfactory solution to his problem due to excessive donor scarring, a depleted donor area, and an unsatisfactory cosmetic result to his grafts. Timetested then approached Spencer Kobren once again. Spencer Kobren told timetested of a little know procedure and physicians by the name of Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell along with their revolutionary new procedure. Timetested sought an evaluation. Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell told timetested they would split up the existing large grafts, move body hair into the donor region to conceal these scars, and revise his poor cosmetic result with the limited donor supply using their revolutionary new techniques. Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell succeeded in every area and literally transformed timetested's life. This immediately arose the full interest of Dr. John Cole, MD. Once the advantages of the Woods technique were clear, Dr. John P. Cole, MD then began an intense study of follicular extraction. Dr. Paul Rose, MD coined the term FIT or follicular isolation technique and DDP (dermal depth analysis). He also suggested an initial chamber for holding the titanium punch. FIT began as a purpose or mission: to develop specific tools that would insure successful extraction on all follicular groups in all patients at a high rate of speed. In other words we desired to make the procedure successful in the hands of any physician that wished to perform the procedure. Furthermore, we wanted to make it possible for multiple patients suffering from hair loss to benefit from this surgical advancement in the field of hair restoration surgery. We developed new tools and instruments and obtain two separate patents for our new instruments. Neither instrument is commercially available yet. One is still only a concept and attempts to make this new instrument have not resulted in a surgical grade level of sharpness yet. The other instrument has been quite successful in insuring good results, but still requires considerable expertise to operate efficiently and properly. It does insure depth control and allows the operator to minimize transection through direct visualization of the graft cutting process. Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) is the world's most scientific method of follicular extraction. This procedure is far more advanced than simple FUE or follicular unit extraction. The techniques and tools required for this procedure insure a far higher yield and better success rate than those from follicular unit extraction (FUE). Size of Donor Area: How Many Grafts are Available from Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Unit Isolation (FIT) Rassman and Bernstein stated in their paper that follicular unit extraction (FUE) requires 8 to 10 times more donor area than standard strip harvesting. They stated that a FOX 1 patient requires 40 sq. cm to obtain 500 grafts. A FOX 2 patient requires 50 sq cm for 500 grafts. Unfortunately, a FOX 4 or 5 patients will yield only 200 to 300 grafts from 50 sq. cm. We are much more efficient than this. In fact, we currently obtain as much as 1200 grafts from 70 square centimeters. We find the most important factor is the density of follicular units and groups. We also believe it is possible to extract 59% or more of the follicular units and groups without creating a noticeably thin appearance to the donor region. Strip Harvesting: The average strip harvest will yield about 7000 grafts. Loose scalps with a high density may yield 8000 to 10,000 grafts. Tight scalps and lower density scalps may yield only 5000 grafts. We believe that the average scalp has about 11,830 available follicular groups or units available by strip harvest. If the scalp yields 7000 grafts, this is 59% of the total availability. In strip harvesting a total width of 3 or 4 cm is often removed from the heart of this 11,830 graft crop of follicular groups. Rather than leaving the area open, each time the area is closed. The resulting scar is typically 0.3 to 0.5 mm wide by 30 cm. This is a reasonably efficient removal to scar ratio. If you consider that 90 to 120 square cm is removed and the resulting scar is only 9 to 15 square centimeters, the ratio of removed donor to scar ranges from 0.075 to 0.17 . Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) The total available donor area in Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) expands from 11,830 potential follicular groups or units to 17,000 potential follicular units from scalp hair alone. This is an increase of 144% more potential total scalp donor area. If the same 59% of the follicles are removed on the average patient, the potential donor reserves soar to over 10,030 potential grafts in the average patient. Scalp laxity has no bearing on this potential. If you assume the resulting scar from each extracted graft will decrease by about 20% during wound healing, the resulting scar from each extracted follicular unit or group will leave a 0.5 square millimeter scar. The total amount of scar from Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) will be about 5041 square millimeters or 50 square centimeters. The total scalp donor surface area with Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) is about 217 square centimeters. Here the ratio of scar to total donor area is about 0.23. This one factor alone is the only significant draw back to an expertly performed Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) hair restoration procedure. Of course, efforts to reduce the ratio of scar to total donor area will eliminate this one disadvantage. Tissue glue and sutures that gather the skin into finer suture lines will help eliminate this single disadvantage. In our ongoing study to assess the width of donor scar we have found that the it is possible to decrease the width of our incisions to 0.57 mm. A 20% wound contraction would result in a total surface area of 0.16 square millimeters per incision. This effectively reduces the total potential scar to 16.3 square centimeters and reduces the scar to total available donor surface area to 0.075 (the equivalent ratio of linear scar to excised donor area from strip harvesting in the best case scenario). As you can see all advantages of strip harvesting are have a potential to be completely eliminated. The increased ratio of scar to donor area will not, however be nearly as noticeable as a linear donor scar. All of our patients to date consider this ratio a minor negative compared to the overwhelming positives. Our techniques often involve efforts to reduce the width of the donor scar. Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) is equivalent to a hair restoration surgery in reverse. Individual follicular units are selectively removed from the back and sides of the scalp as they are moved to the front, top, and crown of the scalp. This results in a natural thinning of the donor area and creates a natural thinning appearance of a bald recipient area. We have found that a smaller session of Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) will create a very natural appearance to the scalp which is cut to 1 or 2 mm in length. If a hairline outline is built along with some isolated follicular groups in the other bald or thinning areas, a rather unusual phenomenon occurs. The patient appears to have no hair loss with the shaved look. We call this the "less is more" phenomenon. In this case, as little as 3000 grafts can give a reasonable illusion of coverage to a class 5 patient and some class 6 patients. Of course this discussion does not include the additional potential donor supply available from the legs, chest, back, stomach, thighs, pubic area, and underarm regions. This additional supply of hair can help turn the most follicularly challenged individuals into candidates for some degree of fullness or coverage from hair restoration surgery. Dr. Ray Woods and Dr. Angela Campbell both state that a chest hair moved to the top of the scalp can alter its growth length from 2 to 3 centimeters to a length of 6 inches. This must result from an increase in the anagen phase of hair growth and a diminution in the telogen phase. It is stated that the body hairs must go through a couple of life cycles prior to converting to this longer length and anagen phase. Our experience shows that they do grow, but the effluvium phase is much longer. Scalp hairs typically begin to grow by the 3rd month, although in strip harvesting only 30% will be up by then. In Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) and Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) we find there is often much better growth by the third month. Still we find that the percentage of body hairs lags scalp hairs at 3 months. An average chest and abdomen measures 15 cm by 22.5 cm. The hair density ranges from 10 to 40 hairs per square centimeter on a hair bearing chest (obviously a chest without hair will have a lower hair density). I have encounter chests with an additional 1000 hairs to well over 40,000 hairs available to hair transplantation due to male pattern androgenetic hair loss. This does not include the thousands of hairs available in other regions of the body such as the legs, back, underarms, and even the pubic area (if you are inclined to desire these and some people are highly motivated to their use while others scoff at this proposal). Histology and Microscopy One of the most interesting aspects of the paper written by Rassman and Bernstein was their histological studies. They found that Fox positive patients have a thinner dermal sheath (anchor), a more elastin rich dermis, no difference in smooth muscle content, no difference in Anagen to Telogen ratios, and a more coarse hair shaft diameter. Our own microscopic studies show no significant evidence of scarring on the surface of the skin even at 45X magnification. This is shown in the below figure and in the FIT skin surface video. In strip harvesting we typically sliver or incise slices that are about 1 mm wide or the width of a single follicular unit or follicular group. We had a patient undergo FIT and subsequently elect to have a strip removed from his FIT donor region 5 1/2 months later. In slivering this strip taken from a previous FIT treated donor region we found no difference between the dermis or subcutaneous fat of the surgically FIT treated areas and the non-surgical adjacent regions. Careful inspection of the Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) grafts under high power magnification reveals that there is a reduction in the amount of subcutaneous fat surrounding the hair shafts. There typically is much more epidermal and dermal tissue surrounding the hair follicles than one generally sees from grafts cut by typical means of strip harvest hair transplant surgery for hair loss due to androgenetic alopecia. One must ask themselves two questions: 1. Why? 2. Is this important The answer to the first is simple but we must first understand the embryology of hair. Hair derives from both epidermal and mesodermal components. The ectodermal components give rise to the components that surround the actual hair shaft. The mesodermal components give rise to the outer root sheath and the dermal papilla. Please take note to the structure of hair as outlined in figure 2. You can see that the mesodermal components are responsible for housing the epidermal structures. In other words the mesodermal components surround the hair follicle like a sock surrounds a foot. It is thought that the mesodermal and ectodermal components interact between one another to form a hair. Embrylogically the epidermal components begin as a collection of cells as the surface of the skin. This collection is met by a collection of mesodermal derived cells immediately internal to the ectodermal cells. The ectodermal cells begin to grow internally an push the mesodermal cells downward. Gradually the mesodermal cells give rise to an envelope that surrounds the ectodermal structures. Other than the hair follicle and its surrounding dermal sheath there are no additional entities that comprise the structure of a hair follicle. There are, however, other structures associated with the hair follicle. The sebaceous gland is located in the middle third of the hair shaft. It empties into the follicular canal. The hair follicle is fed by a blood supply from above and below. The nerve endings to a hair shaft are reported to surround the entire hair follicle. Both the blood and nerve supply are cut regardless of whether a strip, Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) are excised from the donor region. The hair shaft is composed of three parts. The first two parts, the infundibulum and the isthmus (figure 3.) are located in the dermis and epidermis. The lower 1/3rd lies predominantly in the subcutaneous fat. You see that the upper 2/3rd contain the sebaceous gland, and the attachment of the arrector pili muscle. The lower 1/3rd contains no other structures other than structures related to the hair shaft itself. The lower 1/3 rd does comprise parts of the dermal sheath, the hair matrix or bulb, and the Arao Perkins Body, but no other associated structures. The lower 1/3rd is surrounded by adipose tissue. Adipose is not necessary for the survival or well being of a hiar follicle though many noteworthy, yet misguided, hair restoration physicians would have you believe otherwise. We have found it possible to easily remove the surrounding epidermis, arrector pili muscle, sebaceous gland, and dermis from the hair structures internal and inclusive of the follicular sheath (figure 4.). We find it even easier to separate the lower 1/3rd structures of the hair follicle external to the outer root sheath from the surrounding external subcutaneous fat. We have even found it possible to dissect the external root sheath away from the surrounding external dermal structures after tension depilation (removal of the hair shaft through upward tension). The importance of this notation is simple. None of the structures external to the outer root sheath are important to the survival of the hair shaft and its re-growth. Hairs re-grow without the surround structures. They survive, cycle routinely, and live normal lives without the surround structures. Thus, the surrounding tissue is not important to the survival of the hair shaft. Many studies have attempted to prove that larger, beefier, grafts yield more hair. These studies thrive on the argument that you cannot always see the hairs. Any invisible hair structures will be present in the dermis or upper 2/3rds of the hair shaft rather than the lower 1/3rd of the hair shaft. Therefore, it is imperative that the upper 2/3rd be transplanted except on the hairline where additional hair potential cells are not desired (no one wants two hair or more than two hair grafts on their hairlines unless they desire to risk unnatural results). All exodus hairs, telogen hairs, and early anagen hairs are located in the upper dermis. The confines of the follicular group are maintained in the Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE). Therefore, all the structures containing potential hair bearing cells are extracted intact in Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE). Most of the argument surrounding "chubby" grafts implies that surrounding hoards of adipose are necessary to hair survival. This simply is not true. Dermal structures beyond 0.75 mm from the center of the average follicular group or follicular unit are similarly unnecessary to the survival of all hairs. Thus, even this argument for "chubby" grafts is fiction. The simple truth is that all physicians who have done "chubby" graft hair count studies relied on non-physician laymen to compose their data. The results are simply not reliable. Counting hairs is a painstaking job. No physician should rely on a anyone to count hairs unless they possess the utmost degree of skill and compulsion. In fact, counting hairs is something so difficult that it surely is not something you will ever look forward to. The simple fact is that Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) does not impair hair survival or potential yield. If anything, it improves hair survival and yield through many processes that will be elaborated in detail in subsequent chapters. These include inclusion of all surrounding stroma and important hair structures, limitation of time our of body, minimization of graft cutting or dissection by non-physician laymen, limitation of exposure to massive quantities of free radicals, and ischemia reperfusion injury in the recipient area secondary to free radical exposure. These factors most likely will improve yield and minimize shock loss. By reducing these effects, Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) offers significant overall advantages to strip harvesting where it counts most - the total amount of hair on top of you head. The indications for Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) are extensive. We will list them first and subsequently discuss each in detail. 1. The young patient. 2. The active patient. 3. The patient who desires a short hair style. 4. The patient who desire any hair style. 5. The patient who wants the least invasive surgery. 6. The patient who wants a procedure that does no produce a linear scar. 7. Corrective work to the recipient area. 8. Camouflage of old strip scars. 9. Treatment for eyebrow loss, eye lash loss, moustache, underarm hair, or pubic hair or other speacialty cases of hair loss. 10. Extensive scarring of the donor region. 11. Tight donor areas. 12. Depleted donor areas. 13. Those desiring the most advanced form of hair restoration surgery. 14. It is the only true stand alone hair transplant. The Young Patient The rationale behind this indication is so compelling that Dr. Cole now believes that it is constraindicated to perform a strip harvest on a young patient. Furthermore, he feels that it is substandard care for a hair transplant surgeon treating hair loss in the young patient to recommend a strip harvest or to perform a strip harvest without mentioning Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE). First, we must define the young patient. The young patient is someone under 30 years of age with evidence of advanced Norwood Classification (Figure 5.). The young patient may be further defined as anyone 26 years of age or younger with evidence of hair loss due to androgenetic alopecia. The young patient has a much greater potential for hair loss due to androgenetic alopecia. If history has taught us anything in the hair transplant or hair restoration of men and women with hair loss due to androgenetic alopecia, it is the following: hair loss is progressive until the day you die, methods of treatment for hair loss change as individuals age, individual expectations for hair restoration change over time, patient finances are not pre-determined, Individual tendency to live on the brink of debt, patient responsibilities vary according to their present circumstances, the personal view of one's self modifies over time, hair styles vary according to fashion and ones position in life, treatment desires vary over time, and the potential for modern medical advances open many new doors to treatment options for hair loss. Hair loss is progressive until the day you die It is customary for men and women to believe that their hair loss stabilizes over time. It is an interesting fact that when Dr. Cole first entered the hair restoration field for men suffering from hair loss secondary to androgenetic alopecia in about 1990 hair restoration surgeons typically falsely informed their patients and other physicians that hair loss due to androgentic alopecia stopped at age 35. This inaccurate statement was spread by physicians with over 20 years exerpeince in hair restoration surgery and even some that suffered from hair loss due to adrogenetic alopecia. It is mind boggling that any physician with over 5 years experience would not recognize this absurd belief much less one with over 20 years experience seeing and treating men with hair loss. One need only follow the political careers of prominent politicians such as Jessie Helms to recognize this (figure 6). It is very common for us to see individuals that believe their hair loss has stabilized. In fact, many times it will stabilize for several years prior to accelerating again. In other words, hair loss tends to cycle. Individuals will see a massive shedding and hair loss abruptly that subsequently stabilizes. Hair loss may then cease for several years prior to resuming. Others will see a massive and total loss in a short period of time, but this typically occurs to the very young patient who begins to loose his hair in his teens or very early twenties. Individuals often present to the hair restoration surgeon for correction of their hair loss. It is very common for them to say, "my hair loss was abrupt at onset and quite noticeable, but ceased altogether a short time thereafter. They tend to be aggressive in their hair restoration treatment desires through surgical hair transplant. They are more than willing to seek aggressive forms of surgical transplantation in a desire to resolve their hair loss needs. They often accept lower hairlines, wasteful strip harvest techniques and substandard graft preparation. This is a set up for failure later in life. Surgical hair transplantation in the young patient is like offering candy to a young child. The child is more than willing to accept the tasty treat without considering the consequence to their teeth and overall health. Similarly, the young patient often seeks and accepts hair at all costs without consideration of the future ramifications. A few years later in some and several years later in others, the consequences of these aggressive actions become apparent and the patient is left with a permanent solution to his or her hair loss that may leave them permanently disfigured for the remainder of his or her life. The supply of donor hair in the strip harvest donor region (the back and sides of the head) is limited. As the hair loss progresses, the supply to demand ratio decreases. Eventually, the demand may out weigh the supply and the patient can be left without adequate donor reserves to treat the demands. It can be stated with reasonable accuracy that the younger a patient begins to loose his hair, the more advanced the degree of hair loss will be over time. Patients report exceptions to this probability at times. Some state that their father lost the same degree of hair when they were in their early twenties, but did not advance beyond a class 3 with no vertex loss what so ever. While we recognize this possibility and encourage patients to seek a relative that followed their same chronological/historical pattern of hair loss, there is not defined data to support it. Therefore, we persuade all individuals with hair loss early in life to anticipate the worst. This means you may one day develop an advanced degree of hair loss that you would prefer to treat by alternative means. This may include a very short or shaved hair style that would expose a strip linear donor scar. Methods of treatment for hair loss change as individuals age The potential for more advanced degrees of hair loss in the young patient open a plethora of potential treatment options. These may include a short or shaved hair style as previously mentioned. Treatment options might also include a less aggressive pattern of hair restoration. This might be a higher hair line, lower density, or treatment primarily of the lowering fringe. It also might include a hair piece, medical therapy such as Rogaine, Propecia, and Avodart, or non-medical concealments such as Toppik and Couvre. The alteration in treatment desires will not eliminate the linear strip scar, which will be a permanent sign that the individual had a hair transplant. While most are able to hide the linear strip scar, this scar might become readily evident should the individual later be treated with chemotherapy for cancer or suffer from a rare form of total hair loss on the scalp. Individual expectations for hair restoration change over time We often hear patients tell us that they will not be concerned about their hair loss in later years. While we find individuals with hair loss are generally just as concerned with it much later in life as they were in their younger years, we have also found many individuals who would just as soon shave their heads or accept their bald look. For reasons we do not fully understand, occasional patients are no longer concerned with their hair loss. They would just as soon be bald and they prefer being naturally bald. These occasional individuals are embarrassed of their youthful vanity and their hair transplant. The advent of much smaller grafts minimizes the probability that the grafts will appear unnatural, but does not eliminate the donor linear strip scar. This linear strip scar is a permanent reminder to them and anyone who sees it that vanity resolved this person to have a surgical procedure to correct their perceived problem. The strip scar will not disappear over time and puts the person at constant risk of exposure. We have seen one patient we personally treated at age 24. This person had a permanent linear strip scar and desired to simply shave his head and accept his baldness. While this is the exception rather than the rule, it is a probability and one that indicates The only limiting factor was the linear strip scar. Follicular Isolation Technique (FIT) or Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) is the only extraction method in hair transplantation that does not leave a permanent strip scar and allows the patient to later cut their hair in a very short style. patient finances are not pre-determined One cannot predict personal fianances and market trends. Young patients often seek immediate solutions to their hair loss. Hair loss early in life is often minimal. As previously stated, hair loss tends to be progressive and life long. Typical hair restoration procedures are generally billed by the total number of grafts one has. Hair loss early in life generally requires fewer grafts to treat the limited degree of hair loss. Later in life this requirement generally increases. As the requirements increase, the cost may increase, as well. Individuals cannot predict their economic future. They may find themselves in an industry that declines due to financial hardships such as the struggling airline industry has at the turn of the present century or they may find the geographical region struggles due to a the affects of a particular industry such as the oil industry decline's affect on Texas in the 1980s, or the loss of a factory that supported a city such as closing of Kodak in Rochester, NY. This change in economics may affect a person's future. Furthermore, individuals with hair loss tend to be embarrassed by their hair loss and seek avenues to conceal their hair loss. This may include a job that allows them to wear a hat, but does not pay well. They might also avoid social situations that expose them to ridicule by their peers. We have heard of individuals who drop out of school due to embarrasement over their hair loss even though they maintained a solid A average. This may have significant ramifications to their financial future and earning capacity. Hair restoration surgery is not covered by insurance. It is an out of pocket expense and an on going expense due to the progressive nature of hair loss. Therefore, it is imperative that individuals recognize this potential prior to pursuing a hair restoration path. The future financial burdens may exceed the earning capacity of the individual leaving them partly restored and possessing a permanent strip linear donor scar. Once again their options for hair style and method of concealment are severely crippled by the permanent strip linear donor scar. Individual tendency to live on the brink of debt Even if a person is fortunate to maintain their job for the remainder of their life and even if this job entails a solid annual income, people often outstrip their earning capacity. People in generally tend to be pay check to pay check employees, meaning they spend everything they make. In other words they work for money, which means they must work to generate enough money to pay their bills. The more they make, the more bills they acquire. Soon they find themselves spending more than they make and fall into high interest debt. Debt limits one's ability to finance future desires. This may limit one's ability to afford additional hair restoration surgery as hair loss progresses and once again limit hair restoration treatment options and styling preferences. Patient responsibilities vary according to their present circumstances Other times people find themselves with unexpected responsibilities such as a wife, husband, a house full of children, medical bills, aging parents, financial emergencies such as mechanical failures to a car, tuition, etc. Any of these unexpected financial strains can limit one's personal grooming budget. Men in general tend to take care of their families first and themselves last. Women tend to raise their children first while making personal sacrifices. These prevailing trends limit the finances one can devote to themselves. Families might find themselves torn over additional hair restoration procedures and taking care of the family. This often creates a degree of marital strife that is unhealthy to the relationship. If a person suffers from a linear donor scar that cannot be uncovered, it may affect the psychological well being of the individual suffering from it to the point that it impacts their financial future and is harmful to the growth and development of the family. As previously stated, it might affect the earning potential of the individual and have far reaching negative consequences to the family. Alternative hair styles can sometimes resolve the internal conflict and reduce the peril to the family unit. Thus, avoidance of the strip scar has paramount significance to some families. The personal view of one's self modifies over time hair styles vary according to fashion and ones position in life treatment desires vary over time the potential for modern medical advances open many new doors to treatment options for hair loss It is the only true stand alone hair transplant We have noted that body hair can add a significant amount of hair to the overall plan. An average chest and stomach measures approximately 1.5 feet long by 1 foot wide or 22.5 cm long by 15 cm wide. In one instance we estimated that over 40,000 hairs were available for hair transplantation to treat hair loss on the top of the scalp. This can make a significant difference especially to the Norwood Class 5, Norwood Class 6, and the Norwood Class 7 patient. Of course this was an extremely hairy chest and abdomen with a hair density range between 20 and 40 hairs per square centimeter. Hair density on the back of some individuals ranges between 10 and 20 hairs per square centimeter. This too can add a tremendous amount of hair to the hair restoration plan in hair transplantation due to male pattern hair loss. Female pattern hair loss may benefit from leg, pubic, and underarm hair though a woman's legs are often exposed so techniques that limit scarring to a minimum are mandatory.

Traetene voi le conclusioni: ___________________________________________ Advanced Hair Studio, who themselves have a long track record with the UK Advertising Standards Authority, turned complainant against an advert for the Hair Loss Centre (see www.asa.org.uk 13/08/2003). The advert claimed that the laser is "proven hair loss treatment", inviting people to "take advantage of the Hair Loss Centre’s latest LASER TECHNOLOGY to tackle all your hair loss needs." According to the ruling, Advanced Hair Studio "questioned whether the advertisement misleadingly implied that the laser treatment re-grows hair," even though they market laser treatment themselves!!! The ruling states that the advertisers’ main defence was that they’d never claimed that it can regrow hair!!! Nevertheless, they did not send any evidence to show how the laser treatment can treat hair loss. Advanced Hair Studio charge around £3500 for a year’s laser treatment. The ASA have forced them to advertise their Advanced Laser Therapy as "Advanced Hairloss Therapy" as THERE IS NO PROOF THAT THE LASER CAN REGROW HAIR. The only benefit that you’re likely to achieve is from the Minoxidil or Serenoa that they combine it with. These can be bought at a fraction of the cost, and as countless studies show, the benefits of these are EXTREMELY limited. Don’t waste your time or money on this laser crap! ____________________________________________ Lasciamo il laser agli amanti di Star Trek, parliamo d'altro.

Tranquilli xxxxx, quello che dice il dottore è tratto dalle pubblicazioni mediche, non sono sue invenzioni. Il problema è che nella comunità scientifica le novità si propagano ancora con il piccione viaggiatore . Vedrete che se il doc andrà a New York a meta Ottobre, tornerà probabilmente con una idea diversa sulla FUE. La stessa idea la avevano lo scorso anno anche dottori che proponevano solo la strip e che si sono convertiti in breve tempo a tale tecnica. P.S. Jones consiglia la strip solo nei casi in cui si vogliano più di 3000 u.f. in una seduta oppure per abbassare i costi per sessione. Per il resto la quasi totalità degli interventi da lui eseguiti da sei mesi a questa parte sono con tecnica FUE, anzi come dice lui con la Jones Technique. Ciao

"Proprio non capisco(e qua mi rivolgo anche ai vari scettici e/o denigratori della tecnica in questione),mi sembra che ci sia un discreto periodo da cui poter trarre delle conclusioni...o no?" Certamente è così nel caso di Woods (Angela Campbell è la sorella ed operano insieme) ed è per questo che la DHI ha preso come riferimento l'australiano per pubblicizzare il suo passaggio dalla strip alla FUE. Mi riferivo infatti ai quei chirurghi negli US (Cole, Jones, Feller, Rose, etc.) che praticano la FUE da poco più di un anno. Ci sono già risultati positivi anche sulla ricrescita, ma il campione è a mio avviso ancora poco significativo. "C'è la possibilità di reinfoltire zone non completamente calve,migliorandone la densità o no?si è tanto discusso su tale dilemma...come stanno adesso le cose?" La possibilità esiste, ma tutti i chirurghi seri ti diranno che una perdità da shock si verificherà. E' impossibile prevedere se questa impatterà una parte irrilevante dei tuoi capelli, oppure una consistente. Mio personale consiglio: Vai per gradi, riempi prime le zone glabre, poi sei sempre in tempo a fare una seconda passata. Il fatto positivo della FUE è proprio questo, non si rischia di avere una cicatrice sempre peggiore al crescere del numero di sessioni e si può insistere puntando su zone donatrici sempre diverse. Per Vertex: Il giudizio su una qualsiasi cicatrice si può dare solo dopo un anno, un anno e mezzo poichè fenomeni come la diastasi in zone ad elevata tensione e la formazione di cheloidi non si verificano immediatamente. Detto questo, hai fatto una scelta di primissima classe con Ron Shapiro e quindi i tuoi risultati saranno sicuramente i migliori possibili. Per il discorso Woods il problema è essenzialmente economico, dal preventivo che ho richiesto, il doc richiede circa 8200 $ per 600 u.f. a cui devi aggiungere volo e soggiorno. In tutta onestà ed ammirandone le capacità, mi pare un prezzo esagerato. I miei migliori auguri per la tua nuova capigliatura. Ciao

Mah è difficile darti un consiglio in tal senso. Personalmente io utilizzo il minoxidil da molti anni e non sono ancora riuscito a disfarmene del tutto. Ricorda che i benefici di tale farmaco, quando si manifestano, sono sia sulla ricrescità che sul mantenimento di un buono stato dei capelli. Purtroppo non troverai medici che potranno rispondere alla tua domanda in senso definitivo, il giudice dovrai essere te stesso nel comprendere se all'atto dell'interruzione si manifesterà una effettiva e progressiva diminuzione della capigliatura. Se non hai problemi di irritazione con il topico e se perdere 5 min. al giorno non costituiscono per te un problema, non correrei comunque il rischio. Ti ricordo infine che il minoxidil è un promotore della crescita, è quindi dovrai comunque utilizzarlo nel post trapianto per aiutare/velocizzare la comparsa dei capelli trapiantati.

Nessun problema per i toni diretti, scusa se non sono stato sufficientemente chiaro. "tu affermi che non c'è differenza fra questa tecnica e quella convenzionale se non nelle metodiche di prelievo delle u.f. ma....ti pare poco?" Avendo visto alcuni ingrandimenti delle u.f. prelevate con la FUE posso confermarti che, se correttamente eseguita, non ci sono differenze tra una u.f. prelevata tramite FUE e una u.f. sezionata da una strip. Il beneficio nella zona donatrice dovuto ai quasi inesistenti esiti cicatriziali è ormai noto a tutti. "Aggiungi poi che affidandosi a validi medici non si corre granchè di rischi,e...cmq inferiori a quelli della tecnica tradizionale(addirittura?e come mai?)." Il rischio di una tecnica strip per la zona donatrice è assai più elevato rispetto ad una tecnica FUE, in più hai un'assoluta garanzia: non potrai mai più avere i capelli a pochi mm. nella zona donatrice. Questo deve essere ben chiaro, sebbene ancora qualcuno si ostini a pubblicizzare l'invisibilità della cicatrice sulla nuca. L'allargamento della cicatrice a distanza di tempo, così come infiammazioni dovuti ai punti, cicatrici dovute alle graffette(staples), alopecia nelle zone circostanti dovute alla eccessiva tensione in interventi con una eccessiva losanga prelevata o con una lassita insufficiente della cute, credo possano essere argomentazioni sufficienti e costituiscono rischi reali. "Mi viene da chiedermi allora come mai esistono tutte le diatribe e dissertazioni varie sulla validità di questa tecnica?" E' risaputo che in Europa arriviamo con alcuni anni di ritardo nel campo della chirurgia estetica, è sufficiente osservare che abbiamo ancora esemplari di medici che operano con tecniche obsolete e nocive per i pazienti in misura molto maggiore di quanto si osserva negli US. Se ne vuoi una dimostrazione pratica basta che dai un'occhiata a questo documento e a quanto datate risultino tecniche delle quali si parla ancora (rotazione dei lembi, capelli artificiali ) : www.ishr.it/abstract/Abstracts_ISHR.pdf Internet da questo punto di vista rappresenta un'assoluto vantaggio, poichè permette di confrontarsi direttamente con i migliori chirurghi al mondo e, frequentemente, di essere maggiormente informati dei medici nostrani. E' chiaramente necessario avere alcune nozioni basilari di medicina e chirurgia, oppure confrontarsi con un medico "amico". "A leggere il tuo post si ha l'impressione che un intervento di fue sia una passeggiata ma allora perchè ancora tanti dubbi aleggiano sull'argomento?" Se mi riesci a portare una confutazione scientificamente seria su quanto da me detto che non sia chiaramente datata all'anno scorso, sarò lieto di risponderti confidando nell'aiuto dei medici che praticano tale tecnica. In ogni caso l'operazione tramite FUE rappresenta pur sempre un intervento chirurgico con i rischi correlati e quindi va valutato con tutte le premure del caso. "Riepilogando,tu credi che l'unico rischio e/o limite della tecnica fue,sia quello di mancanza di attecchimento delle u.f.?limite pero' scavalcabile affidandosi a uno dei "guru"?" Questo è l'unico rischio che io vedo criticamente. Cole sostiene che la propria percentuale di riuscita va dal 90 al 97% delle u.f. trapiantate (Woods dal 95% in su) e, a parer suo, questo valore è in crescità con l'evoluzione della tecnica. Preferisco attendere e osservare i risultati di ricrescita in alcuni dei suoi pazienti, che però come ben sai non sono definitivi prima di un anno, poi potrò esprimermi più correttamente in tal senso. "Questo poi,se ho ben capito,dovrebbe dipendere dal modo di "estrazione" delle stesse u.F.,che prevede la tecnica in questione?" Esatto, il problema sostanziale sta nel fatto che all'atto del prelievo il bisturi può tagliare il follicolo danneggiandolo irrimediabilmente (transection). Questo vale chiaramente anche per i follicoli adiacenti alla strip prelevata con la tecnica convenzionale. Come mai il "test di idoneità"è stato abbandonato?lo sai? che intendi dicendo che adesso nessuno viene rifiutato?(che adesso la tecnica garantisce per tutti l'attecchimento delle u.f. impiantate o che il test non era cmq in grado di prevedere cio' che sarebbe successo dopo l'intervento?) Il Fox test era semplicemente una biopsia che permetteva di capire la conformazione e l'inclinazione del follicolo, muscolo erettore, etc. Pare che alcuni pazienti a cui è stato detto di essere non idonei al test e quindi alla FUE, siano stati operati con successo sia da Woods che da Jones. Cole, Jones, Alvi e Woods ritengono inutile e superato tale test. Per l'attecchimento ti ho risposto sopra. "Un'altra cosa non mi è chiara: dici riguardo alla zona donatrice che le foto parlano da sole,vuoi ovviamente intendere che non c'è alcun aspetto negativo a caratterizzare tale area ma io non riesco ad immaginare come sia possibile prelevare(anche in piu' sedute)ad esempio 3000 u.f. e non notare visibili diradamenti nelle zone di prelievo.Voglio dire....con la strip si finisce con il tagliar via(quindi eliminare)la striscia di cute che ospita le u.f. da trasferire in altre zone ma con la fue non si notano i prelievi?(e mi riferisco in particolar modo ai rasati come me),tu che ne pensi,Aragorn?" Questo è un ottimo argomento di discussione e preferisco non esprimere ancora un parere definitivo in tal senso. Le megasession con la tecnica FUE sono già state eseguite sia da Cole che da Jones (ti allego il link di un recente intervento con 3700 u.f. prelevate). http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/Attachments/DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG://http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/...DSC019 97%2EJPG E' chiaro che un certo impoverimento della zona donatrice si riscontrerà, devi considerare però che la FUE estende la zona prelevabile di circa un terzo. "Riguardo poi al fatto che nei forum americani nessuno si è mai lamentato della fue,ti chiedo se ne hai visitati alcuni personalmente." Non ho ancora visto nessun paziente dal vivo anche perchè in Italia non credo ci sia qualcuno che si è già sottoposto a tale tecnica, in ogni caso i risultati finali variano molto da paziente a paziente in relazione alle caratteristiche proprie del capello e ti garantisco che è affidabile anche una foto in alta risoluzione per verificare i risultati a distanza. Credo comunque che i tuoi amici della DHI abbiano già iniziato ad eseguire interventi con la tecnica FUE da qualche mese, quindi se ti capitasse di visitarli, credo che potranno sicuramente presentartene qualcuno dal vivo. E' chiaro che ad oggi non consiglierei di affidarsi alla DHI per tale intervento, ma a mio parere solo ai chirurghi più volte menzionati dal sottoscritto. Il rischio riferito da Gekko è come ho già detto presente per chi non ha esperienza e strumentazione sufficiente ad eseguire tale tecnica. Ciao

Ganja, magari ce li avessi io 21 anni . Per Shon, cerco di rispondere alle tue domande: "Quanti anni dovrebbero passare affinchè si possa considerare attendibile e valida una tale tecnica chirurgica?" Non c'è niente di nuovo nella FUE rispetto alla strip, cambia solo il metodo di prelievo delle u.f. "Da quanto tempo invece si pratica la fit-fue?" Ray Woods esegue interventi con tale tecnica da più di dieci anni. Gli altri doc come Cole, Jones, Rose da circa un anno e mezzo. "Chi la pratica da piu' tempo?" Come dicevo sopra sono Ray Woods e Angela Campbell "Quali potrebbero essere i rischi a fare un po' diciamo...da cavia prima che tale tecnica venga definitivamente consacrata?(o abbandonata)." Se ti rivolgi ad un chirurgo qualunque direi uno scarso attecchimento delle u.f., se ti affidi a un medico serio direi pochi e comunque sempre minori di quelli relativi ad una tecnica convenzionale. "Si tratta di rischi che riguardano unicamente la possibilità di non ricrescita delle u.f. impiantate o anche possibilità di danno alle zone donatrici e/o riceventi?" Per la zona ricevente si esegue la stessa tecnica di impianto del metodo tradizionale (lateral slit, Choi/DHI implanter, needle), quindi non c'è differenza. Per la zona donatrice ci sono alcune foto che parlano da sole, così come i commenti di coloro che si sono sottoposti ad entrambe le tecniche. "Anche se non è passato un tempo sufficiente di sperimentazione,ci sarà un archivio di pazienti sottoposti a tale tecnica....risulta qualche"danneggiato"?" Ripeto che la tecnica chirurgica è identica a quella convenzionale, le u.f. prelevate con la FUE prima di essere impiantate sono uguali a quelle sezionate dalla strip. Nessuna segnalazione di pazienti insoddisfatti sui forum US per il momento, considerà però che per avere risultati definitivi sulla ricrescita bisogna attendere almeno un anno. "Sapevo di un test che Cole effettuava per selezionare i pazienti idonei a sottoporsi a tale tecnica,lessi poi che non lo utilizza piu'...è vero? come mai?" Il FOX test veniva eseguito negli stadi primordiali della FUE per verificare l'inclinazione e le caratteristiche delle u.f. e valutarne la predisposizione della zona donatrice per tale tecnica. Cole lo reputa inutile da tempo, così come Jones e Woods. Oggi chiunque può sottoporsi a tale intervento senza timore di essere "rifiutato". Aggiungo che il nostro amico MathiasRex sta torchiando Cole in un interessantissimo thread nel quale evidenzia un ulteriore vantaggio della FUE, quello di poter scegliere le u.f. più ricche di capelli in modo da poter avere un risultato migliore soprattutto per i rinfoltimenti del vertex. Chiudo con un paio di foto: http://www.hairsite4.com/dc/dcboard.php?az...=6498&mode=full http://www.hairlosshelp.com/forums/Attachm...ys%2Dback%2Ejpg e infine l'aggiornamento di un caso che per lunghezza può interessarti: http://mysite.verizon.net/vze3hjqi/id19.html Considera che il primo caso è relativo alla FT di Gho che promette una moderata ricrescita nei siti donatori e che gli ultimi due pazienti si sono sottoposti precedentemente ad una tecnica tradizionale. Ciao

Cole è uscito dalla DHI, credo in seguito alle sue critiche sul "No touch" implanter e comunque non operava regolarmente in Grecia neppure prima. Personalmente ritengo che la struttura greca debba essere una seconda scelta, anche perchè i costi sono nettamente più alti di quelli oltre oceano e coprono ampiamente l'eventuale differenza del volo. Attenzione poi a farsi operare con la FUE da mani non esperte, rischiate di ottenere più danni che benefici. Complessivamente i greci non sono male e probabilmente migliori dei soliti noti italiani, però si può trovare di meglio negli US (le esperienze di alcuni nostri colleghi da Ron Shapiro ne sono un esempio evidente). Ciao

I think it would be great to have an italian translator, shiek. I am looking at the 25th or the 26th of August. I am trying to get some doctors to attend, as well. We want to get the word out. I hope to get a Merck rep there to provide us some good food. I am working on getting some patients too. Currently we have some that are very interested. We can plan for another one, perhaps in a few more months where some more FIT patients can schedule some time off work to go over seas with us. It will be sort of a FIT reunion. If anyone is available to go now, let me know. Perhaps we can spring for your transportation. www.forhair.com ------------------------- John P. Cole, MD 75 14th St. Suite 3260 Atlanta, GA 30309 800 368 4247

Ha ragione il doc. Da Gho: "HM is administered by injecting cultured cells into the sweat pores" Anche a me sfugge il razionale di introdurre cellule all'interno del condotto sudoripero, posso ipotizzare che Gho abbia verificato la stimolazione del follicolo adiacente anche perche più avanti parla di "ringiovanimento" di follicoli miniaturizzati. Speriamo dica qualcosa di più preciso a Ottobre, alle volte le scoperte scientifiche sono casuali e ad una prima analisi possono sembrare assurde.

Antonio, considera che Alvi è canadese e che la concorrenza in quell'area è elevata. Solo per farti tre nomi: Hasson & Wong Robert Jones David Seager Non trovo quindi niente di male che voglia allargare la propria clientela. Credo comunque che i vantaggi di farsi operare in Italia non siano così grandi, soprattutto perchè i costi dell'areo sono ammortizzabili nell'ambito di un 10% sui costi totali dell'intervento. Cosa però molto utile è poter avere un consulto in Italia senza dover lavorare con le foto a distanza. Alvi ha un imprenditorialità molto spiccata, non mi meraviglierebbe se realizzasse sul serio la sua iniziativa. Se gli scrivete ancora, vi consiglio di fare domande dicendo che appartenete ad un forum italiano sui trapianti che conta più di 2000 iscritti ed eventualmente chiedetegli di utilizzare direttamente il forum per pubblicare le sue news. Il marketing, qualora introduca novità positive per i pazienti è sempre ben accetto

Grazie Geronimo, ricambio i saluti. Allargo i ringraziamenti oltre al doc, anche a Sansone, Shon, Mathias, Linux e a tutti coloro che hanno contribuito a rendere questa sezione talmente informativa e così poco polemica da rendere inutile un moderatore . Mi auguro che le iniziative di gruppo proseguano e che ci siano interessanti novità da settembre per il settore dei trapianti. Buone vacanze a tutti !

The future: i think the future will bring a lower transection rate. We are shooting for below 5%. I beleive we will have a better idea of body hair growth characteristics. I beleive we will have others trained and perhaps a decrease in pricing. I hope we can bring on additional tools to expidite the removal process. Currently one of the greatest concerns is the amount of scar tissue we leave if we harvest 59% of the total follicles available from FIT. we are working on ways to reduce this below the total amount produce from strip harvesting. The overall donor availablity from FIT averages 217 sq cm on the scalp alone. i think we will better define this and have a better idea of effienciency ratios. in other words if we harvest from 70 sq cm, how many grafts should we obtain? WE BELEIVE THAT THERE ARE 10,000 FOLLICULAR GROUPS AVAIALBLE IN THE AVERAGE SCALP FROM FIT AND ONLY 7000 FROM STRIP. We hope to better clarify and understand this. We hope to document growth ratios from FIT and better understand the affects of antioxidant solutions, as well as, the affects from limiting time out of body. We hope to improve techniques. so, hold on. There is much more to come. ------------------------- John P. Cole, MD 75 14th St. Suite 3260 Atlanta, GA 30309 800 368 4247

In farmacia puoi anche trovare Minoximen o Regaine in gel. Considera che queste formulazioni sono al 2% e quindi libere da prescrizione medica. Ciao

Grazie mille, ora rispondo anche agli altri che non avevo visto. Ma non c'è un modo per essere avvisato quando arrivano i PM senza aprire ogni volta il profilo?

Mi devi spiegare però da dove si aprono, a me non notifica niente. Scusa ma sono un po' rimba.

Molto interessante, spero sia presente anche qualche italiano. __________________________________________ I have decided to have a FIT seminar in London in late August. I plan to round up some patients and put on this FIT seminar. At this seminar i will show video, have some patients reveal their results, and present a power point presentation demonstrating the compelling evidence at hand why follicular isolation, the Woods Technique, or FUE are my recomended method of hair restoration surgery. It would be nice if Dr. Jones, Dr. Campbell, and Dr. Woods could attend this seminar also. I beleive the only way we can induce more physicians to offer this service is to increase public demand. I sure hope Tom Omastia will come and be vocally optimistic. www.forhair.com ------------------------- John P. Cole, MD 75 14th St. Suite 3260 Atlanta, GA 30309 800 368 4247