Evolution of FUE Hair Transplants

From Plugs to Modern Hair Transplant

Home » Evolution of FUE Hair Transplants

20 Years of Expertise : Every Step Performed in Hong Kong By Doctors

Learning from the Past

Sara’s Comment

Why does hair transplant history matter?
Because the wrong technique doesn’t just fail—it leaves permanent regret. Understanding this journey is key to choosing a clinic that prioritizes long-term results over short-term fixes.

Early Foundations: Lost & Found (1822–1939)

The concept began long before modern techniques.

1822: German surgeon J. Dieffenbach described hair transplantation in animals.

1939: Japanese dermatologist Dr. Shoji Okuda successfully performed modern punch-graft transplants. His work was lost to the Western world after WWII.

The Lesson: Progress depends on shared knowledge. Isolated advances can disappear for generations.

The "Plug" Era & Its Legacy of Regret (1952–1980s)

1952: Dr. Norman Orentreich ( New York ) performed the first documented hair transplant for male pattern baldness, establishing the Principle of Donor Dominance: transplanted hair retains its genetic resistance to DHT. This proved hair restoration could be permanent—but permanence without artistry became a curse.”

Technique: 4mm circular grafts containing 15–25 hairs , called plugs, were punched directly from the donor zone and placed in rigid rows.

Result: Unnatural, “pluggy” hairlines that looked like doll’s hair.

Legacy: Permanent scarring and wasted donor hair. This mistake taught us that hairlines must be soft, irregular, and built with single hairs.

The Transition: Mini-Grafts & The FUT Strip (1980s–1990s)

Driven by the failures of plugs, surgeons began using smaller grafts to improve naturalness. Micrografts ( 1–2 hairs ) and minigrafts ( 3–8 hairs ) emerged, softening hairlines but often creating spotty density.

1984: Introduction of strip harvesting — a single donor strip replaced multiple punch scars.

1994: Dr. Bobby Limmer refined microscopic dissection, enabling pure follicular unit isolation—ushering in the gold standard for natural results.

Progress: Softer hairlines through micrografts (1-2 hairs) and minigrafts.

New Problem: The FUT (strip) method left a linear scar, limiting future procedures and haircut choices.

The Lesson: Reducing scar burden became the next surgical frontier.

FUE Breakthrough: A Scarless Alternative (Mid-1990s–2000s)

The quest for minimal scarring led to a pivotal shift.

Mid-1990s: Dr. Masumi Inaba (Japan) documented the first Follicular Unit Extraction (FUE) using a 0.7mm punch.

Around the same time, Dr. Ray Wood ( Australia ) reportedly used a similar method—later dubbed “Wood’s Technique”

Late 1990s: Dr. William Rassman and Dr. Paul Beinstein (USA) independently developed and published the FUE technique, coining the term Follicular Unit Extraction.

Key Difference: FUE extracts individual follicular units with tiny tools, leaving only dot-like scars, not a linear strip scar.

Why It Mattered: Enabled shorter hairstyles, faster recovery, and better donor area preservation.

Refinement & Ethics: Quality Over Quantity (2010s–2020)

The focus shifted from how many grafts to how wisely they’re used, as the industry grappled with commercialization versus care.

Early 2000s – Tool Evolution (DHI): The Direct Hair Implantation (DHI) technique, using specialized Choi implanter pens, was popularized. While often marketed as a distinct method, it is fundamentally an FUE extraction followed by placement with a different tool. Its rise coincided with the growth of high-volume clinics.

2010s – Robotics & The Rise of Medical Tourism: The ARTAS Robotic System launched, automating extraction. Meanwhile, Turkey became a global hub for high-volume, low-cost procedures (often using DHI tools), frequently performed by technicians. This commodification led to widespread donor depletion and poor planning.

2016 – A Critical Name Change: To combat misleading marketing by such clinics, the ISHRS officially renamed the procedure Follicular Unit Excision. This emphasized it as a surgical act requiring a doctor, directly countering clinics that downplayed its medical nature.

2018 – Precision Evolution (FUE-HD): The technique evolved into High-Density FUE, using ultra-fine tools (0.6–0.8mm) to maximize density while minimizing donor trauma. This represented a shift back to biological precision over high-volume assembly lines.

Modern Refinement & The "No Regret" Standard (2020–Present)

Today’s focus is on long-term planning and donor preservation.

FUE Evolution: Tools became more precise (0.6-0.8mm punches). Techniques like Long-Hair FUE allowed procedures without full shaving.

The Core Philosophy: History taught us that your donor hair is a finite, non-renewable resource. Ethical practice means creating a “lifetime graft budget.”

Key Takeaways

The “plug” era created permanent patient regret, teaching us that naturalness is paramount. A hairline must be built with single hairs, not clumps.
FUE replaced FUT largely because it eliminates the linear scar, offering better donor preservation and healing.
The technique’s official name is Follicular Unit Excision (FUE), a surgical procedure that requires physician oversight for safety.
The central lesson of history is donor preservation. The “No Regret” philosophy is built on protecting your finite donor supply for both today’s procedure and your future needs.

🔍 Choose a clinic that learns from history.
Our services apply decades of medical progress to plan your sustainable result. Take our preliminary online assessment to see how we use these hard-won lessons for your long-term benefit.

MEDICAL - DISCLAIMERS

Images & Information shown are for reference only

Information on this website is provided for general educational purposes only and does not constitute personalized medical advice. It is not intended to promote our service or imply superiority over another.

Individual results in hair restoration vary significantly and no outcome can be guaranteed. The before-and-after images shown represent possible results — not promises. We recommend seeking independent medical advice to discuss your options … Read More

Pre-Consultation Review

Ensure You're a Good Candidate for FUE hair transplant

Why pay for a consultation if you’re not a candidate? Start with our free WhatsApp assessment — the first step in our ‘No-Regret’ protocol to see if hair transplant is a realistic solution for your hair loss.

Still Have Questions ?

If you want to get a personalized answer from our medical team, you can reach us using this form here. We will cantact you as soon as possible.

Our ‘No Regret’ Safety & Precision Protocol

At Dr. Bertram Hair Transplant, we only offer what aligns with natural results, minimal risk, and realistic expectations. Since 2009, our FUE protocols are in strict accordance with evidence-based guidelines from ISHRS and WFI. Every procedure is internally audited against ABHRS surgical benchmarks,

ISHRS

International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery is the leading global medical association that establishes international practice standards and patient safety protocols.

ABHRS

The American Board of Hair restoration Surgery represents the highest standard. To maintain rigorous certification requirements the physician must demonstrate surgical expertise.

WFI

Worls FUE InstituteI serves as the premier educational body focused exclusively on Follicular Unit Extraction methodology. The institute ensures consistent application of safe FUE.