Comparison between FUE technology and FUT technology

Comparison between FUE technology and FUT technology

 

1 FUT method for hair transplantation, hair follicle extraction is carried out under the direct view of the operator, so the separation and implantation of the blank can be more precise, thereby minimizing the damage to the hair follicle; but using FUE In technology, the extraction of hair follicles is performed under the blind state of the operator, and the hair follicle damage is naturally difficult to avoid.

 

2 FUR method for hair transplantation will only leave patients with hair transplants with traces of fine lines after surgery; when using FUE technology, the patient’s scalp will form a wide distribution of spotted marks.

 

3 FUT method for hair transplantation, hair follicles can be extracted multiple times, so it is suitable for large-area transplantation; while FUE technology leaves a wide variety of spot marks when extracting hair follicles for the first time, so it will produce a lot when extracting hair follicles again. The difficulty, so only suitable for small areas of hair transplantation.

 

4 FUT method for hair transplantation, more hair follicles were transplanted at one time, and the effect after transplantation was more ideal. However, the hair follicles transplanted once with FUE technology were less, so the effect after transplantation was not ideal.

 

5 FUR method for hair transplantation, the operation price is cheap; FUE technology is not expensive FUE Transplant Cost In Pakistan 

 

6 FUR method for hair transplantation, the hair removal area can be locked in the highest quality hair supply area of ​​the patient’s head (ie, the lateral area centered on the patient’s posterior occipital trochanter), and the blank taken from here is not only of high quality, but also It also has a live longevity gene, so the postoperative effect is long lasting and satisfactory. Because FUE has a wide range of hair removal, the quality and survival time of the blank are also uneven, so the long-term effect after surgery will be greatly reduced.

 

In fact, the above comparison results are also the real reason for the bankruptcy of the Japanese hair carrier “aircraft carrier”. It turned out that when the group fully adopted FUE technology for hair transplant surgery, a large number of subjects not only did not receive the expected results, and some of the surgical failures, even because of the infrequent hair resources, were wasted and damaged. The implementation of the repair surgery. As a result, many patients and the group have had a steady stream of medical disputes. So far, the Japanese hair transplant super-aircraft carrier has sunk in the “FUE technology” that has been fueled by its reputation. This is really “CFE also FUE, defeat also FUE!”

 

This shows that in today’s society where the trend is ubiquitous, although some trends can be infinitely exaggerated and deeply rooted in the hearts of the people, no matter how great this trend is, under the baptism of time and practice, it will be objectively and fairly tested. Therefore, for a large-sized hair transplant, the FUT method is still safer and better to ensure good postoperative results. This has already been proven by pioneers in countries such as Europe, America and Japan. Is it necessary for our patients to make unnecessary sacrifices?

 

However, unfortunately, there are always some blind surfers in the country who are willing to follow the tide in the storm! The final result can only be “returning to the sky, sighing and sighing”, such things have long been common in the domestic medical beauty market. In the past few years, under the temptation of huge commercial interests, the “Ogilvy Injection Breast Augmentation”, which is flawed in science and endless, is not a lot of “small invasive, no need to open the knife”. Year? ! In contrast, FUE has some merits after all, but it has been promoted slightly exaggerated. Speaking of this, some industry colleagues may feel that my evaluation of FUE technology is too harsh and rigorous, but think about the limited hair resources of our patients and their desire to improve the image of the head, as a conscience Responsible, level doctors, shouldn’t we stand up and point out to thousands of patients a bright avenue that can reap the hope?