The procedure is extremely safe. In our practice, there has never been a serious complication, either during or after surgery. It is best regarded as a minor procedure rather than a major operation.

The most commonly treated conditions are male-pattern and female-pattern hair loss. However, with appropriate precautions and careful patient selection, hair transplantation can also be used to treat other forms of hair loss, including certain scarring alopecias.

No, it is entirely possible to add hair to thinning areas of the scalp without damaging existing hair, provided that grafts are placed carefully and aligned with the angle and direction of the native. Our preference is to operate earlier, before individuals become profoundly unhappy with their hair loss and at a time when the procedure can be more easily camouflaged.

No. Individuals can consider a transplant at any age if they are bothered by their appearance. Younger patients often have a milder degree of thinning, but the emotional impact of hair loss can be particularly significant, making treatment proportionally more important. Although many younger individuals request aggressive, high-density graft placement, they paradoxically require a more conservative long-term surgical plan. Just as there is no minimum age for the procedure, there is also no maximum age limit.

Yes. A large percentage of women experience hair loss, and many are excellent candidates for hair transplantation. In general, women face fewer long-term aesthetic risks with transplantation, which often makes the procedure more forgiving. However, this reduced downside is balanced by some limitations in potential benefit. Because women more commonly experience diffuse thinning, the donor hair available for redistribution is often less permanent. As a result, transplantation in women tends to “turn back the clock” rather than provide a permanent correction, offering meaningful but typically time-limited improvement.

No. We can provide an estimate of how many grafts we expect to harvest, but surgical variables ultimately determine the final number. Adhering to a precise number risks encouraging surgeons to alter their plan to meet a target rather than respond to the clinical realities on the day of surgery.

In a single session, we typically transplant 2000-3000 follicular unit grafts in males and 1500-2000 in females. This number reliably produces a noticeable cosmetic improvement while limiting certain risks. Larger sessions allow treatment of a broader area in one procedure, but may require shaving the scalp to facilitate timely graft placement. It is also important to note that larger sessions carry a marginally higher risk of complications in both the donor and recipient areas.

Grafts are typically transplanted at a density of 30–35 follicular units per square centimeter. This provides meaningful cosmetic improvement while avoiding the use of an excessive number of grafts in a limited area. Mathematically, it is not possible to restore full native density to a thinning scalp without sacrificing the size of the area treated. In other words, there is no such thing as a free lunch. Although older individuals with small, stable areas of thinning may be candidates for higher-density placement, this approach should be avoided in younger patients due to uncertainty about how large their donor and recipient areas may become over time.

Dr. Unger offers a no-shave technique. Although operating through longer hair increases the time required to perform the procedure, it makes it easier to follow existing hair patterns and therefore helps produce a more natural result. Equally important, the longer hair provides camouflage, resulting in significantly less visibility during the post-operative period.

Patients who wish to undergo a larger session may need to shave the recipient area to allow timely graft placement. Those undergoing FUE will typically require shaving of the donor are, unless it is for a smaller session.

Hairs are implanted in the same way they are removed as individual follicular units, ensuring that the results always look natural. This contrasts with older techniques, in which larger grafts were placed and could appear as unnatural clumps of hair.

Over a lifetime, most individuals require multiple sessions, although this depends on their goals, the size of the initial area needing treatment, and how their hair loss progresses. We often conceptualize the scalp as comprising three regions: the frontal area, extending from the hairline to a line drawn between the ears; the midscalp, extending from the frontal region to the point where the scalp begins to slope downward; and the vertex, from the midscalp to the rear hair fringe.

Most patients ultimately require treatment of the frontal and midscalp regions at minimum. These are the most important aesthetic zones, as they shape how patients see themselves and how others see them. In particular, restoring the frontal area reframes the face, and this framing effect is often the most impactful part of hair transplantation.

The crown can be transplanted if patients desire and if sufficient donor reserves exist, but it is typically the least important aesthetic region. In many ways, crown transplantation benefits “the view of the neighbour” more than the patient, because individuals rarely see this area themselves.

People can receive either a good or a poor hair transplant, whether the procedure is performed in Turkey, in Canada, or anywhere else. The deciding factor is not the country but the quality of the physician and clinic. The major issues that differentiate clinics are their aesthetic judgment and their long-term planning.

Aesthetically, the biggest pitfalls include constructing hairlines that are too low, too straight, or too coarse. From a planning perspective, common problems include operating on individuals who are poor candidates, planning recipient areas without accounting for future hair loss, depleting the safe donor area, or harvesting outside the true safe donor zone by mistaking the current visible donor fringe for the permanent one.

Additional considerations with international clinics include limited oversight of infection-control standards and reduced transparency regarding physician credentials. Choosing a surgeon who is a member of the ISHRS, which maintains educational standards, clinical practice guidelines, and a code of conduct, provides some assurance of quality.

Perhaps the least significant concern, though often top of mind for patients, is the distance from their clinic in the event of a medical complication. Given that complications are exceedingly rare, this is a minor issue for most individuals.