Is there any draw back in case I opt for FUT over FUE?
For anyone that has little knowledge of the hair restoration method by transplant, the distinctions between the names of FUE and FUT might be deceptive. In reality, FUE and FUT are different methods of treatment and while some individuals tend to cast their decision of choosing a transplant method based on their own research and personal choice, it is always best to let your own circumstances dictate which the optimal procedure be utilized for you is.
So before jumping onto a conclusion about what is the best method of hair transplant, it is best to understand each of them. Both FUT and FUE have their own benefits and limitations. The main difference between the two remains in the method of implanting the grafts from donor area.
Both FUT and FUE hair transplant techniques accomplish hair replacement procedure. FUT (Strip) is an incredible transplant technique for hiding larger bald areas with lesser hair damage. In FUT, there is no scar left on scalp behind due to Trycophytic closure method. In FUE, hairs are taken from back by a machinery tool and then drilled and punched into the recipient zone. Process of graft harvest is the same in both the methods but the technique is different. Mega Bollywood star Salman khan hair transplantation is done by FUT. Also a cricket commentator Harsha bhogle has undergone FUT and their excellent results of FUT are evident in their looks. On other hand, Cricket player Virendra sehwag hair transplant surgery is done by FUE
In which cases is FUT (STRIP Technique) better than FUE?
FUT is performed by removing a strip of skin containing hair from donor area, the back (crown part) of the scalp, then the strip is anatomized further into smaller grafts made up of 1, 2 or 3 hair follicle, and then harvested in to the bald area (recipient site). FUT is best to cover extensive balding and thinning over entire scalp. Larger bald areas are only possible to cover with FUT.
Advantage: FUT can be helpful when more amounts of hair are needed to fill the recipient area in case of severe baldness with smaller donor zone or donor hair supply.
Drawback: FUT leaves a linear scar at site of removal of strip- on the back of scalp, which can be typically decreased by implementing trichophytic suture method. It takes more time for healing at site of removal of strip- in the donor area. In comparison to FUE, with FUT transplant, the grafts or the follicles might get damaged at the time of dissecting as it needs a lot of skill which will further affect the results.
While in the FUE: The technique involves individual hair follicle units containing 1, 2 or 3 hairs to be removed with very tiny punches leaving behind visually no scar at donor site.
Advantage: Quick healing of donor site, suture less, painless and barely seen tiny scar. The best part about FUE is in case of limited donor hair supply in a patient, body hair can be used by FUE to cover advance baldness. The wastage of grafts in FUE hair transplant technique is comparatively lesser than FUT as only needed amount of grafts are removed from the donor site. This makes it an optimal hair transplant method.
Patients can readily return to their normal lives in FUE as fortunately there are no marks of cuts, stitches or scarring left behind.
Drawback: Not capable of covering larger recipient area when density in donor area is very low. There is a higher possibility of follicle transaction if the doctor is inexperienced or unskilled as instrument/punch is inserted vaguely by assuming the direction of hair follicle, over implanting results in an uneven density in donor area.
Summary on the comparison between hair transplants with FUE and FUT
It would be justifiable to say that the scarring is the major issue associated with FUT, with this being the actual reason why most people decide to take up the FUE approach. However, while the scars may seem to be a turn-off for many patients, some would lay more emphasis upon the functionality of FUT in terms of larger coverage, hair quality and other advantages whilst making their decision.
Undeniably, the biggest advantage of FUT is the amount and quality of the hair that is being harvested at the recipient site, which is generally of a much better standard than those removed and transplanted with FUE. As all of the hair stems from the “healthy” area of the scalp, patients are possibly to escape any future problems with their new hair. This is in comparison to FUE, where cases have been recorded in which the transplant hair has begun to fall out again due to the reason it emerges from areas of poor quality.