When it comes to hair restoration, there are several techniques available in the market today. Two of the most popular techniques are the traditional FUE technique and the no shave FUE technique. While the latter may seem like a convenient option, there are several reasons why DiStefano Hair Restoration’s traditional FUE technique is superior.

One of the most significant advantages of traditional FUE is that it leaves almost no noticeable changes behind. With our technique, a .8-.9mm punch is used, which results in minimal scarring or damage to the donor area. In contrast, the no shave FUE technique uses a larger 1.05MM punch, which can leave permanent marks that will be visible if the hair is later cut short. Therefore, traditional FUE provides a more natural and subtle result in the donor area.

Another important factor to consider is the cost. No shave FUE is generally more expensive than traditional FUE, primarily because you are spending the same amount of money for the time it takes to complete a traditional FUE, but you are receiving less grafts. The argument behind no shave FUE is that there is no visible sign that a hair transplant was done in the donor area, but the reality is that by day 7-10 most scabs have fallen off from the donor area and hair is starting to fill in again.  It will still be noticeable that you had a hair transplant by looking at the area where the grafts were transplanted, regardless of doing a no-shave FUE or not.

In traditional FUE, the surgeon can extract more hair follicles as the donor area is fully visible and accessible. This means that more hair follicles can be harvested, resulting in a fuller and denser head of hair. In contrast, the no shave FUE technique can only extract a limited number of grafts per session, which may not be sufficient for people with extensive hair loss.

Lastly, if you are someone who loves to experiment with different haircuts, then the no shave FUE technique may not be the best option for you. It is because the larger punch used in this technique can leave visible marks that can be seen if the hair is cut short. Therefore, high fade style haircuts can be challenging to achieve, defeating the purpose of a hair transplant altogether. In contrast, traditional FUE leaves almost no noticeable changes, providing the freedom to style your hair as you please.

In conclusion, while the no shave FUE technique may seem like a convenient option, it has several drawbacks that make traditional FUE a better choice. Traditional FUE provides a natural and subtle result, is more cost-effective, yields more grafts per session, and provides the freedom to experiment with different haircuts.

Therefore, if you are considering a hair transplant, it is best to consult an experienced surgeon like Dr. Chris Heinis at DiStefano Hair Restoration and opt for the traditional FUE technique for optimal results.