Embarking on an extraordinary voyage of progress, the captivating realm of hair restoration has witnessed a remarkable transformation throughout history. With origins rooted in ancient surgical practices, the field has evolved significantly, driven by the unwavering determination to restore hair loss and augment natural beauty. This article explores the intricate history of hair restoration, shedding light on noteworthy milestones and the gradual development of revolutionary techniques.
You may also be interested: Beard Graft, Why Is It Done?
Stage 1: Japan, 1939 – Hair Transplant Beginnings
Surprisingly, the first hair transplant procedures were conducted in Japan during the 1930s. Dr. Shoji Okuda, a physician, described his experiments in a groundbreaking paper published in 1939. Dr. Okuda utilized small dermal punches similar to those used in current follicular unit extraction (FUE) procedures. He harvested hair-bearing skin from the sides and back of the scalp, grafting these segments onto bald areas of the scalp, eyebrows, and even other parts of the body. Unfortunately, the outbreak of World War II overshadowed Dr. Okuda’s findings, causing them to be largely forgotten for decades.
Stage 2: New York, 1950s – The Birth of the “Plug”
In the early 1950s, Dr. Norman Orentreich, a renowned dermatologist in New York, embarked on his own hair transplantation experiments. Unaware of Dr. Okuda’s work, Dr. Orentreich used larger punches to move groupings of dozens of hair follicles from the back of the scalp to balding regions. He initially aimed to study the effects of scalp grafts on other dermatological conditions but made a crucial discovery. These transplanted grafts continued to grow and thrive in the new locations, defying expectations. Dr. Orentreich coined this phenomenon “the principle of donor dominance,” laying the foundation for the hair restoration industry. Recognizing the potential for cosmetic hair restoration, Dr. Orentreich began performing the first hair transplant procedures in his New York office. By the late 1960s, he had already completed approximately 10,000 hair transplant surgeries.
However, despite the groundbreaking nature of Dr. Orentreich’s work, there was one significant drawback: the results. The tools used at the time, known as “punches,” were large and extracted grafts that contained 20-30 hair follicles in one piece. The resulting “plugs” were spaced far apart, creating an unnatural appearance often likened to “doll’s hair.” Moreover, the punch removal method caused extensive scarring, resembling a checkerboard pattern, in the donor area. While hair transplantation had made its medical debut, further improvements were necessary.
Stage 3: 1980s – Divide and Conquer
Ingenious doctors recognized the need for smaller grafts and began using progressively smaller punches. However, even at 4mm in size, the transplanted grafts still exhibited an unnatural appearance. In the 1980s, a few doctors had a groundbreaking idea: instead of moving one large plug as a single unit, why not divide the plug into smaller pieces and transplant them closer together? This novel approach proved to be highly successful. By dividing plugs into smaller segments called “micro grafts” or “mini grafts,” doctors achieved significantly better results than the earlier plug procedures. Some clinics even employed magnification techniques to create even smaller and more refined grafts, enabling larger sessions and improving outcomes. Another crucial advancement during this period was the introduction of strip harvesting. Some inventive physicians proposed removing a single strip from the donor region, cutting it into micro and mini grafts, resulting in a better appearance in the donor area and an increased number of grafts. With these innovations, modern hair transplantation began to flourish. However, a groundbreaking development was just around the corner: microscopic dissection and the introduction of follicular unit grafts.
Stage 4: Microscopes, Follicular Units, and Mega Sessions
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, innovative physicians, notably Dr. Bobby Limmer in Texas, utilized microscopes to dissect donor tissue strips. This microscopic view allowed them to identify natural groupings of hair follicles known as “follicular units” and divide the strips accordingly. This groundbreaking technique, known as Follicular Unit Transplantation (FUT), enabled the safe transfer of these delicate grafts to the recipient region. Clinics began performing larger strip harvests and transplanting more follicular units in single sittings. These extensive procedures, termed “mega sessions,” quickly became the gold standard in the industry. The minimal damage to the donor area, the ability to produce refined follicular units with minimal trauma, and the dense packing of these tiny grafts in bald regions led to excellent results. Finally, hair transplantation gained widespread acceptance as an effective and natural treatment for hair loss. However, challenges remained for patients who couldn’t undergo strip harvesting or had already exhausted their donor supply. Was there a solution for them?
Stage 5: Follicular Unit Excision (FUE)
In 1989, an Australian physician began revisiting the harvest method initially used by Dr. Okuda in the 1930s. He experimented with using needles and small dermal punches to extract follicular units one by one from the donor area. By the mid-1990s, he had openly discussed his technique. However, the approach remained shrouded in mystery and wasn’t widely understood or accepted at the time. In the early 2000s, several physicians in North America started investigating this technique. In 2002, a paper on Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) was published by Drs. Rassman and Bernstein, leading to a few physicians offering the procedure in small settings. However, FUE results were unpredictable, and it was generally considered less reliable than FUT.
Nevertheless, innovative physicians continued refining extraction devices and techniques, leading to improvements in FUE. As the visibility and demand for the procedure increased, so did the inevitable overhype from individuals seeking financial gain. Currently, various opinions exist regarding FUE, with both supporters and dissenters voicing their perspectives. The general consensus among physicians who can perform both FUT and FUE is as follows: both techniques have their advantages and disadvantages, and their suitability depends on the individual patient’s needs; many physicians believe that starting with FUT maximizes the lifetime graft count and donor potential; FUT is typically more suitable for larger procedures, while FUE is preferred for smaller cases; FUE leaves small dot scars in the donor area, allowing for shorter haircuts before the scars become noticeable compared to a linear FUT scar; however, it’s important to note that both methods result in scarring, and claims of scar-less surgery are unfounded; both techniques produce minimal scarring in the donor area, which can be easily concealed; the growth rates of FUE are still a subject of debate, but published literature suggests that FUT generally yields more consistent and robust results.
With the evolution of both FUE and FUT, hair transplant surgery has reached a point where patients have excellent options to maximize their donor potential and achieve exceptional results.