FUE HAIR TRANSPLANTS AND HOW WE’VE EVOLVED
What Is CIT® Hair Transplant? Cole Isolation Technique (CIT®) is Dr. John Cole’s namesake innovation. A vast improvement over Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE), CIT® emphasizes minimal invasiveness and accuracy. This decreases the chance of scarring and encourages natural-looking hairlines without a major impact on the FUE hair transplant cost.
FUE itself is a major innovation in hair transplantation industry. A technique that, ideally, involves extracting each follicle from the donor site, FUE is actually the first hair restoration method that minimizes scarring. Hair transplantation before the method involved heavy scarring and long recovery times -Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT) and Scalp Reduction both fit within this category. Such techniques bring paltry results as well. FUT and other older techniques lead to doll-like hair and unnatural appearing hairlines.
ENJOY THE RESULTS YOU DESERVE
40% of our patients request we correct other doctors’ work!
Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) is a vast improvement over Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT). However, FUE truly depends on the skill of the surgeon. Most clinics lack the proven expertise of Forhair. Patients who try other clinics come to us with scarring, low hair yield, and unnatural looking hairlines. Forhair excels at repairing these other clinics’ damage. Selecting us first guarantees the results you expect and deserve. We have covered the advantages and disadvantages of each technique on the FUE vs. FUT hair transplants page.
Talk to a hair transplant specialist today!
Give us a call at (800) 368-4247 to talk about your hair restoration goals and how we can help you. It's a private chat and there's no obligation to commit.
THE EVOLUTION OF REGULAR FUE HAIR TRANSPLANT
FUE lessens scarring and recovery time while also enhancing results. The method is also quite broad. Hair transplantation specialists may extract individual follicles or multiple ones, for instance. Further, FUE results depend on the surgeon’s skill and artistry. Modern hair transplant specialists first began developing FUE in the late 80s. It did not become feasible until the early 2000s, though, and for a few reasons.
First and foremost, FUE requires years to master. Practitioners must literally extract and transplant thousands of individual follicles. Such procedures require hours upon hours to complete. FUE only became prevalent as surgeons became more proficient and invented specialized techniques and tools. Today, there are numerous ways to practice FUE. Specialists use machines, robots, mechanical extraction tools, and a slew of different techniques that can radically change FUE hair transplant cost. None, though, offer the comprehensive benefits of CIT®.
THE DISADVANTAGES OF
REGULAR FUE
FUE has significant advantages over older hair restoration methods. However, this both depends on the type of FUE and the surgeon’s skill. For all its strengths, though, there are areas that regular FUE can improve upon.
- Miniscule Scarring - Less pronounced than FUT, FUE can nonetheless lead to "moth-hole" scarring due to its circular shape.
- Loss of Stem Cells - Donor sites extracted through general FUE lose their stem cells, leading to little or no chance of follicles growing back, decreasing overall hair density.
- Hairline - FUE enables specialists to create natural appearing hairlines if they have the skill -doctors unskilled with FUE can create awful hairlines.
- Density - Much like hair placement, density depends on the specialists' skill -follicle grafts must be carefully extracted and transplanted.
Different FUE techniques, of course, lead to different results. Scarring, graft yield, hairline quality, and more all depend on a surgeon’s experience, their extraction and transplant methods, and use of instruments.
CIT®: A TRUE
ADVANCEMENT IN FUE
FUE is outright the better choice for those who do not want noticeable scars. FUE scars are small and round, while FUT scars will always be long and linear. Scarring is less noticeable with FUE because scars are small, if noticeable at all, and scattered throughout the scalp. Scars from FUT is are bigger and localized, making them more noticeable.
- Minimal/No Scarring - CIT® rarely leaves scars and is the only FUE method that leaves stem cells, encouraging scalp recovery.
- Better Density - Graft-per-graft, CIT® has a success rate of 97%+ percent.
- Donor Area Recovery - CIT® is the only hair transplant technique that enables donor areas to potentially regenerate follicles.
- Faster Recuperation - Patients recover from CIT® procedures faster than any other FUE method.
An advanced technique, CIT® requires special training and tools. Dr. Cole personally instructs all his staff in how to properly administer the method. Proper training is essential. CIT® offers superior results but also emphasizes specialist skillsets and experience. Both are necessary to ensure a convincing hairline with uniform hair density.
At 4 months I started to see an explosion! I am very happy with the results. I definitely recommend Dr. Cole, i don't recommend anybody else and that's the truth and the truth speaks for itself...just watch my videos...
Patient BBV
Codetic
LATEST HAIR TRANSPLANT VIDEO RESULTS
CIT® AND HAIR REGENERATION TREATMENTS
The unique strengths of CIT® make it perfect for hair regeneration treatments. These groundbreaking formulas deliver successive boosts of growth factors that generate stem cells. In turn, this hastens growth while improving scalp health and hair density. Forhair continues researching ACell MatriStem®, Platelet Rich Plasma, and other treatments to better improve patients’ results.
ACELL - MATRISTEM®
TECHNOLOGY
ACell MatriStem® treatments promote recovery and density. The advancement has many uses, particularly for surgical post-op. Administered to the scalp, ACell repairs and nourishes hair follicles. Such nutrients increase blood flow and follicular progenitor cells, both essential for reinitiating growth.
Forhair’s exclusive ACell techniques specifically help donor areas regenerate hair follicles following surgery and replenishes the donor area supply. With ACell, an average of 30% to 40% of CIT® follicle grafts regenerate, leading to an average 130% to 140% yield -or 300 to 400 new follicles for every 1,000 grafts. No other clinic, regardless of their typical FUE hair transplant cost, offers such top-caliber results.
CYTOKINE RICH PLASMA (CRP)
CYTOKINE RICH PLASMA (CRP)
Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) is an advanced treatment from the patient’s own blood. Like ACell, it has been used for years to heal wounds. Growth factors help stimulate cellular regeneration, and PRP has a ton of them. In conjunction with ACell, PRP encourages continued follicle stimulation for years. The treatment is also feasible without CIT® or other hair restoration procedures. A recent study reports that 50% of patients with thinning found the injections advantageous.
Forhair continues researching solutions that improve PRP. Recent advancements include further isolating helpful growth factors and stripping unnecessary platelets. the result is Cytokine Rich Plasma (CRP), a concentrate with six to eight times more potency than PRP. Not only more powerful, CRP also enables the body to better absorb and process growth factors. In fact, patients enjoy 99% growth within four and a half months.
CIT® VS. ARTAS VS. NEOGRAFT
CIT® delivers the best results available today. As Dr. Cole was perfecting CIT®, though, other advancements in FUE became available. Two advancements, in particular, receive a lot of marketing.
- Neograft- A device that automates extraction through air suction
- ARTAS- A robotic system that automates the entire FUE procedure
Each system lacks the unique benefits of CIT® while also having major pitfalls. Look at the table below to better compare these new FUE techniques.
CIT® and ARTAS Vs. Neograft Comparison Chart
FEATURES | ARTAS | NEOGRAFT | CIT® (COLE FUE) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scarring | “Moth eaten” scarring | Depends on operator | Minimal |
| Hairline | Depends on operator, | Depends on operator | Unique |
| Graft success rate | Generally 90% | Depends on operator | Generally 97% |
| No-shave option | Selective trimming | Depends on operator | Yes, C2G |
| Placement accuracy | Depends on operator | Depends on operator | Always accurate |
| Procedure duration | Four to eight hours | Depends on operator | Comparable to FUT |
| Patient viability | Dark, straight hair | Everyone | Everyone |
| Surgeon experience | ARTAS training | Depends on the clinic | 20+ years |
| Surgeon activity | Depends on the clinic | Depends on the clinic | Always hands-on |
| Recovery time | Generic | Generic | Generic |
| Minimal growth time | One year | One year | 99% in 4 1/2 months |
| Cost | $7 to $15 per graft | $7 to $10 per graft | Case-by-case |
| Special considerations | Manual hairline | Adverse to follicles | Donor regeneration |
The real truth, as the chart indicates, is that hair transplant quality depends on both the instruments and the clinic.
ARTAS and Neograft both heavily market to patients, leading many to assume that these brands offer superior results.
However, both Neograft and ARTAS have their detractions as well. Neograft’s system can be too intense for follicular health while ARTAS leaves visible scars and has a higher transection rate than truly experienced FUE surgeons and technicians.
Specialists who use these devices rarely, if ever, develop the skills of an experienced FUE surgeon. Neograft is particularly notorious for minimally training its own technicians who then fly to different clinics on an appointment-by-appointment basis. Meanwhile, ARTAS technicians and surgeons must undergo significant training as well as pay a $1 per graft royalty, leading to a higher FUE hair transplant cost.
CIT®, on the other hand, emphasizes the surgical team’s experience and skill. Forhair exclusively uses Cole Instruments, the sharpest punches in the world, to ensure quality grafts each and every time. Emphasis on true minimal invasiveness also offers a unique benefit we already cover: donor regeneration. Forhair, a case by case, proves itself to offer superior artistry and superior methods for truly impressive results.
SUMMARY: REASONS TO ELECT CIT® OVER OTHER FUE METHODS OR FUT
- CIT® is less invasive
- Does not leave a tell-tale linear scar
- Faster and less painful recovery
- Low transection rate of under 3%
- Natural hairlines and optimal aesthetic results
- Superior FUE hair transplant cost
- Maximal graft survival
- Maximizes donor hair for harvesting
- Allows physicians to “cherry-pick” grafts that will result in an optimal yield
- CIT® is virtually undetectable
- Can be performed even when the scalp is too tight for a strip procedure
- C2G®, or CIT® to Go, is a non-shaven version of CIT® -no need to shave your head!
