Is there a level of baldness that a transplant couldn't help?

[NathanC]

I've been taking a look at the Norwood scale again and in particular the scales of 6 and 7. With hair loss as advanced as this, is it possible that transplants or any kind of surgical procedure would be fruitless, despite the thickness or density of one's remaining hair?

[Lain]

Interesting question and quiet frankly you may answer it with yes it makes a difference - at least in my opinion.

Check this:

http://www.baldingblog.com/2009/08/03/this-patient-wouldve-been-bald-without-hair-transplants-with-photos/

In my opinion some hairs on the head ar better than having none. So if it is possible to get 4000 grafts for a procedure I would consider it fruitful.

[Mark]

I've been taking a look at the Norwood scale again and in particular the scales of 6 and 7. With hair loss as advanced as this, is it possible that transplants or any kind of surgical procedure would be fruitless, despite the thickness or density of one's remaining hair?

Well, the thickness and density of the donor area, as well as the laxity of the donor scalp, is the big factor in determining whether you'll be able to get good coverage. We've had some patients who have been a norwood 7 and we've given them a pretty good coverage.

You have to remember that in those instances, we typically don't transplant all over the scalp. It's mostly in the front, and then the patient will typically comb the hair back over the scalp that's uncovered. This guy is a pretty good example of what I'm talking about. (http://newhair.com/next/full-face-photos.asp?pt=zu)

-Mark

[NathanC]

Thanks for your invaluable information guys. It's great to know that as long as the rest of your hair is good and healthy as well as your scalp then you're likely to qualify for good coverage. It's fantastic how quickly technology marches on and it gives serious worriers like myself some hope. (By the time I will need to do somethingions, who knows where we might be?)