J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. (Oct–Dec 2019) 18(4):509–517 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12663-019-01245-6 REVIEW PAPER Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) Hair Transplant: Curves Ahead 1 1 Ravi Sharma • Anushri Ranjan Received: 4 July 2018 / Accepted: 21 May 2019 / Published online: 28 May 2019 Ó The Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons of India 2019 Abstract The hair transplant has become widely popular Introduction aesthetic procedure. Follicular unit transplantation (FUT) and follicular unit extraction (FUE) are two commonly The history of hair transplant can be traced as early as 1822 used and accepted techniques. FUT requires excision of when Dieffenbach experimented with hair transplant in strip of tissue from occipital donor area leading to linear birds [1]. The field of surgical hair restoration thereafter scar. To overcome scarring and other complications of progressed in two different directions where one group FUT, FUE technique has been attempted which involves started exploring role of autografts while other segment of harvesting of small individual follicular units. Hair trans- surgeons attempted various flaps and serial excisions, the plantation has been successfully used in correction of former technique by far dominated and was adopted alopecia, cleft lip scars, post-burn or surgical scars, vitiligo globally with time [2, 3]. and as an adjuvant to other maxillofacial procedures. FUE In early attempts, Japanese dermatologists Sasagawa demands greater skills and orientation but can yield [4], Okuda [5], Tamura [6] and Fujita [7] used small excellent results in experienced hands. Several maxillofa- autografts containing hair follicles for the correction of cial surgeons have incorporated hair transplantation pro- scars and cicatricial alopecia, but they never reported the cedure in their aesthetic practice successfully. Sound technique for androgenetic alopecia and their work went knowledge of surgical technique, armamentarium and unappreciated for years. Later, Dr. Norman Orentreich who proper surgical planning are essential for desired results. is also considered as father of modern hair transplantation The aim of this article is to explain FUE technique, risk and performed hair transplant with 4-mm punch for ‘‘punch complications, holding solutions and other associated fac- grafting’’ technique and discussed the idea of donor and tors in detail. A simple protocol has been put forth for recipient site dominance [8, 9]. But it was not until 2002 reference and for better understanding of the technique. when Rassman et al. [10] described the FUE technique in detail and discussed various clinical and microscopic fea- Keywords Alopecia Á Follicular unit extraction Á FUE Á tures of follicular grafts harvested from 1-mm punch. Since Hair transplant Á Holding solution Á PRP then, FUE technique which is also referred or modified as FOX procedure, FUSE (follicular unit separation extrac- tion) method, Wood’s technique, follicular isolation tech- nique (FIT), individual follicular group harvesting (IFGH) [11, 12] is gaining constant popularity among hair & Ravi Sharma restoration surgeons and their patients [3]. [email protected] Hair loss is a worldwide problem affecting both sexes, Anushri Ranjan males being more. At present, Hamilton–Norwood classi- [email protected] fication system for male pattern baldness and the Ludwig system for females are most commonly used classification 1 Centre for Excellence in Esthetics and Dentistry, Nandan Apartment, C-72 Sarojini Marg, C-Scheme, Jaipur, systems [13]. In past few years, several maxillofacial sur- Rajasthan 302001, India geons have expanded their practice in cosmetic and hair 123 510 J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. (Oct–Dec 2019) 18(4):509–517 restoration surgeries. Moreover, hair transplant techniques hair from non-scalp areas (chest, beard, etc.) is harvested have been successfully used in camouflage correction of [12]. cleft lip scars, face lift scars, post-burn or traumatic scars, reconstruction of eyebrows, eyelashes, beard, mustache, vitiligo and as an adjunct to various maxillofacial proce- Technique dures [14–19]. Despite worldwide interest, there is a gen- eral dearth of the literature in maxillofacial journals on this The fundamental technique of FUE followed by authors is topic. The aim of this paper is to discuss the various aspects explained here. The procedure is performed under local of novel FUE technique in detail, associated risks and anesthesia, and sedation/general anesthesia is rarely indi- complications, authors experience, graft holding solutions, cated (usually in apprehensive patients or allergy with local recent advances and other key factors. Informed consent anesthetic solution). Patient is asked to trim or shave head a was obtained from the patients, and necessary ethical day before surgery. (The donor area hair can be left around guidelines have been followed by the authors. 1 mm for visualization and orientation.) Premedication protocol includes antibiotic (cephalosporins, azithromycin, etc.), steroid (methylprednisolone 8 mg) and an antiemetic FUE v/s FUT orally 30 min before surgery. The recipient area is care- fully marked keeping in mind the existing baldness, sus- The two widely accepted techniques of hair transplant are ceptible areas and patient expectations. Surface anesthesia follicular unit transplantation (FUT) also known as strip with EMLA cream helps in reducing injection pain, but technique and follicular unit extraction (FUE). While FUT needs to be applied 1–2 h before surgery with occlusive involves excision of hair-bearing strip from the donor area dressing for optimal action. After surface asepsis with and dissecting into small follicular units, on the other hand povidone iodine or chlorhexidine solution, ring block in FUE, individual follicular grafts are harvested with the anesthesia of occipital and frontal region (frontal region help of manual or motorized punches. Neither one tech- anesthesia can be given just prior to recipient site prepa- nique is superior than other as both techniques have their ration or once grafts are harvested) is given followed by own merits and demerits. The main advantages and dis- tumescent infiltration of donor and recipient area with advantages of FUE when comparing with FUT are enu- 30 ml 2% lignocaine mixed with 5 ml 0.5% bupivacaine, merated in Table 1 [11, 20]. 30 ml normal saline, 0.5 ml adrenaline (1:1000) and 1 ml FUE does not leave a linear scar as compared to FUT. triamcinolone 40 mg/ml in a normal adult patient. Once Several surgeons prefer trichophytic closure of the FUT desired anesthesia is achieved, the follicular units are wound or performing FUE for masking old conspicuous harvested using adequate size punch (0.7–1 mm) and for- FUT scar in donor area. FUE is an ideal technique when ceps [11, 21] (Fig. 1). Table 1 Advantages and Pros disadvantages of FUE Less visible scar Shorter postoperative recovery Less armamentarium and staff Minimum graft preparation Body hair can be used (body hair transplantation) Can be done in tight scalp cases Minimal risk of nerve injury or excessive bleeding Surgeon can selectively pick grafts from donor area Cons Time-consuming Longer learning curve Transection rate is higher/fragile grafts with loss of surrounding tissue Higher chances of buried grafts or folliculitis Wider donor area is required Multiple sessions may be needed for extensive cases Subsequent sessions may become difficult due to widespread tiny scars Very fine trimming of hair is needed 123 J. Maxillofac. Oral Surg. (Oct–Dec 2019) 18(4):509–517 511 facial edema occasionally occurs on third or fourth day after surgery and is aesthetically unpleasing to the patient. Cold packs, proper sleep posture, intraoperative and post- operative steroids are used to prevent or reduce facial edema [22, 23]. Scabs should be washed off with mild shampoo with very minimal pressure from second or third day onward. The grafts are secured to recipient site at sixth–ninth postoperative day [24]. Local application of aloe vera preparations has shown to be beneficial in folli- culitis and healing of the surgical wounds [25]. Folliculitis or pustules at recipient site is another common complaint of patients after few weeks which mostly subside sponta- Fig. 1 Follicular units harvesting with FUE technique neously without harming grafts, and oral antibiotics are rarely needed [26, 27]. FOX test is done with first few grafts to evaluate ease of The donor site heals, but hypopigmented scars of harvesting grafts and rate of transection. Then, the grafts 1.5–1.6 mm diameter are often visible on donor area; are scored on the scale of 1–5 as explained in Table 2. The hence, the term ‘‘scarless hair transplant’’ is a misnomer for score of FOX 1 or 2 is ideal for FUE, while FOX 3 is FUE [28]. Inadvertent subluxation of follicular unit grafts known as neutral case, and surgeon should consider con- below the dermis level intraoperatively may lead to cyst tinuing with FUE technique on its own discretion, skills formation [29]. Necrosis leading to cicatricial alopecia of and indications. Transection rate will be high with signif- donor site has been reported as another rare complication icant loss of surrounding fat and damage to follicles in of FUE [30]. Adverse drug reaction, surgical site FOX 4 and 5, and hence, FUT is preferable in these hypopigmentation, bleaching of hair due to hydrogen per- patients [10, 11]. oxide irrigation, sensory disturbances of donor site, hic- The grafts are preserved in cold 0.9% saline. Once the cups, etc., are other rare complications. Immediately after grafts are harvested (Fig. 2), the recipient slits are prepared hair transplant, the grafted and surrounding hair may enter using appropriate 18–20 gauge needles or blades. Each into postoperative effluvium or shock loss where sudden follicular graft is then carefully transplanted in the prepared increased hair fall is frequently noticed by the patients. The slits. Utmost care should be practiced while handling of common complications are enumerated in Table 3 grafts and the grafts should be kept moist at all time during [23, 26–31].