Dr. Hitzig: ACell/Arterial PRP 1 year photos - frontal & donor treatment

[HairSite]

Photos courtesy of Dr. Hitzig and posted in the same sequence as they were provided to me.

Per Dr. Hitzig: “1 year follow-up after 1 session in front only with ACell, and ACell/Arterial PRP injections only (no transplant) in rear. Donor area after 1 year”.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Photo 3

Photo 4

Photo 5

Photo 6

Photo 7

Photo 8

Photo 9

Photo 10

[AJ1]

While it does look like there is definite growth in the front, why do doctors keep making the same mistakes with the pictures over and over again. Why can’t they have the patient have the same hair length in before and after photos. The longer hair in the after photos makes it tough to determine exactly how much new hair there is.

[NeverAgain]

Is there a before picture showing what the donor scar was like prior to Acell & PRP treatment?

[fckhrls]

» While it does look like there is definite growth in the front, why do
» doctors keep making the same mistakes with the pictures over and over
» again. Why can’t they have the patient have the same hair length in before
» and after photos.

Gee, I wonder. Has to be a mistake. That they keep making. Over and over and over again. Couldn’t possibly be on purpose. No. Has to be a mistake.

[AJ1]

I’m giving the Dr. the benefit of the doubt since he seems to try and be documenting a new procedure. However, I do think that anybody that does pictures should have to abide by some very simple protocols. I don’t know the exact protocol, but it should be something like, same lighting, same angle, same distance, same hair length, same camera. Very simple. It doesn’t have to be complex. But at least make an effort.

[Ahab]

»
» I’m giving the Dr. the benefit of the doubt since he seems to try and be
» documenting a new procedure. However, I do think that anybody that does
» pictures should have to abide by some very simple protocols. I don’t know
» the exact protocol, but it should be something like, same lighting, same
» angle, same distance, same hair length, same camera. Very simple. It
» doesn’t have to be complex. But at least make an effort.

I, too, am frustrated by the different length of the hair in both photos.

However, if you were the patient in the photos, would you want to cut your hair short and look balder for a few months, just so some website specators can get a better look?

Now on the other hand, if these photos are supposed to be of someone who was treated only with PRP and Acell, why is there a photo of what seems to be the donor area?

And maybe I’m wrong, but do the guy’s frontal hairs in the after photo, look like transplants?

That said, I applaud the doctor for his efforts.

And I believe there must be an improvement because I doubt the doctor would be misleading us, but an improvment that is difficult to demonstrate via casual photographs, and much more evident by actually having seen the patient before and after in person.

[AJ1]

“However, if you were the patient in the photos, would you want to cut your hair short and look balder for a few months…”

It should be part of signing up for the treatment to me. Pictures will be taken following a certain protocol. I don’t know why the hair length can’t be the same in the before and after pictures. He had to walk around looking balder after the first pictures, why not the second? Just part of the deal to me.

It seems the photographs are part of the evidence that it works, so you need to make that evidence as consistent as possible so people can make a clearer judgment on the results. If you aren’t going show the pictures to anybody, why take them at all?

[Jakeb]

So, was there a transplant here or not? It’s unclear to me by the description.

[Freddie555]

» So, was there a transplant here or not? It’s unclear to me by the
» description.

It clearly says there was a transplant in the front but not the back.

“1 year follow-up after 1 session in front only with ACell, and ACell/Arterial PRP injections only (no transplant) in rear.”

At least that’s how i’m interpreting the phrase 1 session. Am i wrong?

About the only positive thing I can say is that at least he does not look worse in the back given that MPB is progressive. I can’t quite tell what if any effect beyond preservation of hair ACell/Arterial PRP had in the back.

I’m of the opinion that without DHT blockers, any positive effect of ACell/Arterial PRP would be greatly masked/reduced due to the destructive effect of DHT.

Not a breakthrough by any stretch of the imagination but please doc continue the research as the jury is out. The earlier photographs of a strip transplant where one side treated with Acell had hair growing and the other side was sparse/scar tissue was friggin impressive. That was in the back of the head where the hairs are not affected by DHT.

How about ACell/Arterial Blood + Propecia/Avodart for 1 year.

[Brock_Landers]

Why has no one commented on the fact that the transplanted front looks pluggy, sparse! I even noticed one or two two hair grafts in the hairline. Acell and donor preservation are great, but if a surgeon can’t make the final result look natural (which is the entire point of the procedure) then who cares about Acell!

[Stevie.Dee]

» Why has no one commented on the fact that the transplanted front looks
» pluggy, sparse! I even noticed one or two two
» hair grafts in the hairline. Acell and donor preservation are great, but
» if a surgeon can’t make the final result look natural (which is the entire
» point of the procedure) then who cares about Acell!

You know, maybe its Acells fault because it animates the follicles to produce new hair and now he has 4 hairs coming from one Follicle

You know this guys has still the ressources to do multiple transplants so with a touch up its getting better and better.

And i think that the results only with focus on the hair itself are good, because the hair is completly capable of growing LONG and not to grow up a little and then minituarize.

Also we dont know how many grafts were harvested.

If i had to choose between “One time full hair transplant with depleated donor” and “Multiple procedures with the same result like a full one time hairtransplant, but without donor depleation” guess what i would choose…absolutely the second option for several reasons.

1. You never knew if you need donor in the future (carring or trauma or burn victim or whatever)

2. Maybe you get a midlife crisis some day and want a NW0 hairline, you can never say for sure

All i see from those results are :

1. Results with Acell seems consitent over time and in patients (i am speaking of acell in combinations wirth all this PRP/Arterial blood etc)

2. It is now possible to create more density with less graft harvesting

3. Minituarized follicles retain back their normal healthy characteristics

When Dr Hitzig Spoke about those 75 Beard hairs resulting in more then 200 hairs, its high likely that he damaged multiple hair follicles and this resulted in recreating those grafts.

Another reason for me to highly belive that those hairs are permanent. Because how possible and likely is it, for a damaged follicle in an DHT hostile area to maintain or grew one or “more” hairs, which are still existing after one year. Even with the regenerative ability of hairs i would say the chance of this to happen is under 3%

Lets face it normal PRP has to be done almost all three months or so to refresh the effect. And even with Propecia i highly doubt that those hairs would survive one year follow up.

I know it sounds maybe odd but to me its like a really soft form of genetic manipulating or engineering.

Also it could be possible that this procedure loads up the empty fuel and balding starts from anew but this time slower and not so drastic, because of the time your dht level will with ago of course decrease and there is a high chance that the hair itself gains somehow a little bit of resistance against DHT.

WHat i wanna say is, the benefits far far far far outweight the non existing downsides.

I believe in the theory that our hairjust needs a kickstart with enough support to work normally. And maybe this kickstart are single implanted bear/hair plucks.

I just did a fun math equasion where i said if 75 beard grafts plucked are equal to 200 resulting hairs what would XXXX beard hairs do. It was really funny to see the numbers rising. And as i said before it showed me that you could gain more density then before with less grafts involved.

Here are just a few numbers, i didnt say 75 bear hairs are equal to more then 200, i just stick with the 200 to make calculations easier. A few random numbers if results were consitant of course.

75 = 200
375 = 1000
825 = 2200
1350 = 3600
1800 = 4800

I stop here because we could play this thing all day long to infinity and beyond. The point is if this keeps to be consitant, then well the idea about hair transplants as Illusions become obsolete.

Its exciting thats for sure, i am really wondering where we will be in two years from now on

[hairdar]

» Per Dr. Hitzig: “1 year follow-up after 1 session in front only with ACell,
» and ACell/Arterial PRP injections only (no transplant) in rear. Donor area
» after 1 year”.

Amazing if true.

Is that the donor area from a previous transplant or have plucked hairs been used.

I’m a bit confused as to what was ‘donated’ here ?

[hairman2]

» While it does look like there is definite growth in the front, why do
» doctors keep making the same mistakes with the pictures over and over
» again. Why can’t they have the patient have the same hair length in before
» and after photos. The longer hair in the after photos makes it tough to
» determine exactly how much new hair there is.

has it ever occurred to you that the patient may not want to have his hair short? It’s not like he is a clinical trailist and has to abide to some pre-defined protocol. Dr. Hitzig cant force him to shave his head for your satisfaction.

[googoo]

» “However, if you were the patient in the photos, would you want to cut your
» hair short and look balder for a few months…”
»
» It should be part of signing up for the treatment to me. Pictures will be
» taken following a certain protocol. I don’t know why the hair length can’t
» be the same in the before and after pictures. He had to walk around
» looking balder after the first pictures, why not the second? Just part of
» the deal to me.
»
» It seems the photographs are part of the evidence that it works, so you
» need to make that evidence as consistent as possible so people can make a
» clearer judgment on the results. If you aren’t going show the pictures to
» anybody, why take them at all?

Remember AJ that these are paying customers. These are not the kind of studies by a big pharma company where people are paid to be in the study. These are paying customers who once they pay and get the work done they do not want to have to shave their hair off. They shave their hair off in the beginning so the doc can better see their scalps to work on their scalps, but once the work is done the patient wants to grow his hair out and the doctor can’t make the patient shave it off. If the doc tries to make the patient shave off his hair for us then the patient will go to a different doctor.

[albert]

First of all, thank you very much to Dr Hitzig for the photos provided.

We don’t know how many grafts that were transplanted (maybe 1000-1500?), but whatever, donor area seems okay for me, but regenerated? When FUE is performed with a great donor area and small amount of grafts (1000 is small), donor area is not very “injured”.

It would be nice to have another photo where more grafts were used, and more photos of the donor area, in order to judge the results better.

I agree with the standard protocol of photo documents. At least the lenght of the hair must be the same!

Cheers

[AJ1]

Remember googoo that these are not standard procedures. These are experimental procedures. If he wants a standard procedure, he doesn’t have to take pictures. But if he wants to take part in experimental procedures, then he should be willing to take proper pictures to see how well those experimental procedures work.

[AJ1]

» » While it does look like there is definite growth in the front, why do
» » doctors keep making the same mistakes with the pictures over and over
» » again. Why can’t they have the patient have the same hair length in
» before
» » and after photos. The longer hair in the after photos makes it tough to
» » determine exactly how much new hair there is.
»
» has it ever occurred to you that the patient may not want to have his hair
» short? It’s not like he is a clinical trailist and has to abide to some
» pre-defined protocol. Dr. Hitzig cant force him to shave his head for your
» satisfaction.

Of course that occurred to me. But this is not a standard procedure. For experimental procedures, it is well within the experimenters right to obtain the necessary evidence to prove that it works. If the patient doesn’t want to take proper pictures, the patient can just get a normal procedure. That’s within his rights.

[YM1]

» Remember googoo that these are not standard procedures. These are
» experimental procedures. If he wants a standard procedure, he doesn’t have
» to take pictures. But if he wants to take part in experimental procedures,
» then he should be willing to take proper pictures to see how well those
» experimental procedures work.

It all depends on the agreement between the patient and the doctor, there is no rule that says the patient must be willing to take proper pictures one way or another.

[AJ1]

» » Remember googoo that these are not standard procedures. These are
» » experimental procedures. If he wants a standard procedure, he doesn’t
» have
» » to take pictures. But if he wants to take part in experimental
» procedures,
» » then he should be willing to take proper pictures to see how well those
» » experimental procedures work.
»
» It all depends on the agreement between the patient and the doctor, there
» is no rule that says the patient must be willing to take proper pictures
» one way or another.

Of course not. That’s my point. There doesn’t have to be any agreement. There doesn’t have to be any pictures. There doesn’t have to be anything.

But there SHOULD be. If you are doing an experimental procedure, evidence should be gathered so that it can be determined if the experimental procedure worked. Part of that evidence should be photos. And if you are taking photos, then there should be protocols to ensure both the before and after photos are consistent, so that the evidence is clear. Otherwise, taking photos is kind of a waste of time.

And since it is an experimental procedure, the patient should be willing to do this. If he is not willing to have his progress documented properly, then the patient should not be taking part in an experimental procedure. He can just get a normal transplant.

Nobody has to do anything. But if you are documenting an experimental procedure with pictures, then it should be done properly.

[YM1]

» » » Remember googoo that these are not standard procedures. These are
» » » experimental procedures. If he wants a standard procedure, he doesn’t
» » have
» » » to take pictures. But if he wants to take part in experimental
» » procedures,
» » » then he should be willing to take proper pictures to see how well
» those
» » » experimental procedures work.
» »
» » It all depends on the agreement between the patient and the doctor,
» there
» » is no rule that says the patient must be willing to take proper pictures
» » one way or another.
»
» Of course not. That’s my point. There doesn’t have to be any agreement.
» There doesn’t have to be any pictures. There doesn’t have to be anything.
»
» But there SHOULD be. If you are doing an experimental procedure, evidence
» should be gathered so that it can be determined if the experimental
» procedure worked. Part of that evidence should be photos. And if you are
» taking photos, then there should be protocols to ensure both the before and
» after photos are consistent, so that the evidence is clear. Otherwise,
» taking photos is kind of a waste of time.
»
» And since it is an experimental procedure, the patient should be willing to
» do this. If he is not willing to have his progress documented properly,
» then the patient should not be taking part in an experimental procedure.
» He can just get a normal transplant.
»
» Nobody has to do anything. But if you are documenting an experimental
» procedure with pictures, then it should be done properly.

Agreed. As much as I appreciate what Dr. Hitzig is doing, one area he can improve is the documentation skills, clear photo documentation is a must otherwise there is no point doing the experiment. You gotta give credit to the doctors who are posting in the hair transplant forum, most of them know the drill by heart what makes good before and after comparison.