|
Hey Bradly...i did some search for you:)
Here is a quote from one of Dr. Cole's posts:
" I am not a huge fan of donor sealing. donor sealing is simply taking the top section off a graft and putting it back in the donor extraction site. This is just bald skin. It will not typically grow hair unless there is a resting telogen hair high in the dermis that is relocated back to the donor area. Mostly it is simply the top of a graft with hair fragments an no viable hairs. We tried the same thing 3 years ago, well before Dr. A even began doing FUE. we were not impressed with the results.
Placing bald skin plugs back into the donor holes will not prevent any of the potential complications of FUE and it might actually be deleterious. By placing the plug of bald skin back into the extraction site, you limit the ability of the donor extraction site to contract. The space occupying bald skin exerts an outside pressure on the contracting skin that could make the extraction site more visible.
we are well versed in using plugs of skin from our long history in the hair surgery field. Plugs of many sizes have been used for years. Skin grafts of many sizes have been used too. Typcially, we saw that the plug of skin placed into a extracted hole lost its pigment or it became hyperpigmented 15 years ago. Skin grafts do the same thing and this is essentially what the donor sealing is- a skin graft. The primary method of grafting 15 years ago was to cut holes in the top of the scalp and place plugs ranging from 1mm to 5 mm in size. The resulting skin graft was typically lighter or darker than the surrounding area. therefore, donor sealing is nothing new and it offers no advantages. We prefer to allow the extraxction sites to contract and to treat them with anti-inflamatory agents to reduce the risk of hypopigmented spotting or to place body hair grafts into the extraction sites. This offers far better advantages than donor sealing in our opinion. We've tried both and we find our techiniques superior. of course we are open to Dr. A performing a study to test all methods if he likes and then to present his data in a scientific forum. We've evaluated all methods on our own and we have presented our efforts at medical meetings to a large group of physicians. This is what Dr. A should do in my opinion, as oppossed to simply marketing a technique that he claims to have invented even though its a technique that's been around in one form or another for over 40 years. he should also consider showing the results of this effort one year later rather than before the fragments of dead hair fall out. these dead hairs are not going to grow. if they stay in too long they might even create a foriegn body infamatory auto-immune reaction that can lead to a pseudocyst formation. " |
|