Community by and for patients to share experiences and recommendations

Is Robotic Assisted Hair Transplant Surgery Worth it?

5/17/2016 12:31:24 PM

Robotic assisted hair transplant surgery - it sounds pretty cool right?  But how accurate is the robot in comparison to a skilled and experienced hair restoration physician?  Is robotic assisted hair transplant surgery all that it's cracked up to be?

The ARTAS Hair Restoration System automates the extraction portion of a follicular unit excision (formerly known as follicular unit extraction) or FUE procedure by  attaching a digital imaging device to the patient's donor region which uses advanced software to map and identify each follicular unit in the donor region.  The interface can determine each follicular unit's individual orientation, direction, angle, distribution pattern and position relative to the scalp and precisely harvest each follicle with minimal transection.  So given that this is an automated procedure, can anyone use it?  Does it require experience?

Like anything else, the ARTAS requires a skilled and experienced surgeon to use the machine and adapt depending on each individual's needs, goals, etc.  Something can always go "wrong" and if it does, a neophyte doctor or inexperienced surgical assistant would be clueless on how to proceed.

While the ARTAS is a hot new trend, the overwhelming response by patients on our hair restoration forum and many experienced doctors is that the ARTAS needs some work and doesn't deliver the kind of quality that a skilled and experienced surgeon can using a manual or even much more simple motorized tool. 

Like most aspects of hair restoration, the surgeon is much more valuable than the tool they use and thus, anyone considering hair transplant surgery is encouraged to research all physicians they are considering and select one who has a proven track record of producing outstanding results.  This is true whether they utlize the ARTAS or not.  To see a list of surgeons we recommend, some of which  use the ARTAS, click here.