A Side-by-Side Study of FUT vs. FUE Graft Availability in the Same Patients and Its Implications on Lifetime Donor Supply and Management

Abstract

Introduction: One of a patient's most important goals is meeting expectations of coverage and density. Limited donor supply is a handicap in many patients with respect to achieving this goal. Choosing an approach that maximizes lifetime donor supply would be beneficial. Controversy exists over which technique, or combination of techniques, is best for maximizing donor supply. Some feel that FUE alone is sufficient, while others feel that the use of FUT in combination with FUE may be better in patients requiring greater numbers of grafts.

Objective: The goal of this study is to get a better understanding of the difference in donor supply available with FUE only, FUT only, or Combination (“combo”) FUT/FUE.

Study Design: A side-by-side study was done in which two patients had FUE only harvested from one side (half) of the head, and FUT only from the other side (half). This “side by side” harvesting was done two times one year apart. The number of hair (grafts) obtained per technique on each side (after two sessions) was recorded along with the “residual hair” density on both sides. From this data, the total amount of hair that FUE only, FUT only, and Combination FUT/FUE could potentially obtain was calculated and compared. Hair Mass Index and Coverage Value were also determined to support the findings.

Conclusion: More hair and grafts were obtained using combination FUT followed by FUE than by either technique alone. Although many practitioners feel that using FUE only can take care of the hair loss needs of most patients, there may yet be a population of patients who will benefit from the ability to harvest a higher number of grafts. It is important for hair transplant surgeons to have options available to give patients maximal donor if desired.