The FUE vs FUT debate has been around for so long now. Few understand the differences between the techniques and their side effects. In this article, we will discuss the differences between FUT vs FUE.
FUE vs FUT: The Standard Hair Transplant Techniques
Both FUE and FUT are are the primary techniques for the procedure. Other techniques are variants of the FUE hair transplant. Both FUE and FUT have a similar process overview. Wherein both include extraction of hair follicles, sorting grafts, channel-opening, and finally implantation.
To understand the underlying differences, we’ll divide the FUE vs FUT discourse into points.
Extraction Of Grafts
- In FUT your doctor extracts grafts from the back of the scalp by removing a layer of skin. This leaves behind a big wound that needs sutures. And over time this heals into a very visible scar.
- In FUE, to extract grafts, a surgeon uses a motor punch that is around 0.8 mm in diameter. The punch creates an incision around the hair follicle and it becomes easy to pull them out with tweezers. Your surgeon repeats this until they get the right number of grafts. This technique leaves no scars at all.
This step is the same in both FUE and FUT. Using a blade, your surgeon will create incisions on the recipient site. Those incisions will host the new hair follicles to prepare the site for implantation. The number of incisions depends entirely on the number of grafts to be implanted.
This procedure is also the same in both FUE and FUT. Once the recipient site is ready, grafts will be carefully inserted in the incision. Marking by that, the end of the surgical procedure.
Aside from procedural differences, or in other words, as a result of these procedural differences; FUE costs more. With FUE there is no linear scar or any scarring at all. In addition to that, it allows for shorter recovery periods and lower risks of infection.
FUE is especially helpful when patients want to undergo hair transplantation on the beard, eyebrow, or other body regions. All these perks are, of course, a product of its minimally invasive nature. Given all that, FUE comes at a higher cost than FUT all around the globe so that it is not within the common man’s budget.
But, there are other alternatives that give you the same benefits for fewer costs. Turkey, for example, is a plausible hair transplant destination that offers high quality to cost ratios.
Variants Of The Standard Methods: FUE vs FUT
As we stated previously, there are only two standard hair transplant techniques. Other techniques are in reality variants of the standards with minor differences in equipment. To be precise, there are only variants of the FUE technique. Seeing as FUE is the most popular technique, it is always prone to advancement. Additionally, it has more potential in comparison to FUT.
FUT, on the other hand, is an outdated technique that is almost extinct on the market and is never subject to development.The vast majority of these techniques are exclusively offered by clinics in Turkey. Given its the hair transplant capital of the world. Without further ado, the developed FUE hair transplant techniques are currently Sapphire FUE and DHI Choi FUE.
- The Sapphire FUE follows the same procedure to the dot as the standard FUE hair transplant technique.
- The difference relies upon the equipment used and the butterfly effect this minor change initiates. Sapphire FUE uses blades made from the sapphire gemstone. So while this may seem like a trivial change, the use of sapphire to make the edge gravely impacts the structure.
- Sapphire blades have a V-shaped end in comparison to the U-shaped end in regular steel blades. As a result, the sharper end of sapphire allows surgeons to create more immaculate incisions at a much higher rate.
- With the increased level of precision in Sapphire FUE, there is no risk of damaging surrounding tissue. Moreover, healing rates are folds quicker with Sapphire FUE as a result of its sharp blade end.
DHI Choi Technique
Likewise, DHI FUE hair transplant replicates every step of the FUE technique. But this technique uses a special pen that excludes incision and implantation. In DHI, the last two steps are merged into one. This technique employs a pen-like needle that opens channels and simultaneously implants grafts.
During surgery, nurses usually load the pen with grafts where the surgeon will then use it to make incisions. Once the needle pin is inserted, the surgeon will load the grafts. This makes the process faster, but since it exposes the delicate grafts to extreme action; it carries more risks.
What To Take From The FUE vs FUT Discourse
To cut the doubts clear with the FUE vs FUT discourse, keep a few facts in mind. FUE and FUT are both the foundational protocols for hair transplants. Every other technique then branches out from the FUE to be a variant of it.
- The key distinction between FUE and FUT is in the extraction phase.
- Typically, to sum up the FUE vs FUT argument, the most profound difference relies on the technique of graft harvesting.
- FUT leaves monumental damage with its invasive technology in comparison to the FUE technique.
- Although the FUE technique comes at a higher cost, the value and satisfaction gained from them outweigh the financial factor. In other words, patients are getting value for their money.