ArticleInternational journal of trichology
Evaluation of Follicular Unit Extraction Technique as a Method for Hair Restoration Problems.
Article in International journal of trichology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Context: Androgenetic alopecia, traction alopecia, and primary cicatricial alopecia can cause distressing scalp hair loss problems affecting a large number of both sexes. Follicular unit extraction (FUE) is one of the best ways to achieve improving conditions of those cases. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the FUE technique as a method for permanent hair restoration problems. Settings and Design: Channels for the grafts were created through pieces of hand-cut razor blades. Subjects and Methods: Twenty patients suffering from alopecia were eligible to participate in the study. They were subjected to FUE. Results: On comparing different types of alopecia, we found that cicatricial alopecia was significantly more common among younger patients, unlike traction and traction types which were relatively more common among older patients ( Conclusions: Till now, there is no specific algorithm for treating patients with hair loss. However, there is a general preference of patients toward surgical options being less time-consuming and achieve better results. Whatever the cause is FUE showed good results concerning postpatients satisfaction concerning their appearance and visual age.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.