Hair loss is a common issue that affects a large number of people worldwide. It can have a significant impact on an individual’s self – esteem and confidence. In recent years, robotic hair transplant machines have emerged as a revolutionary solution in the field of hair restoration. These machines are designed to perform the hair transplant procedure with greater precision and efficiency compared to traditional manual methods. In this article, we will explore the two main types of robotic hair transplant machines, along with their advantages and disadvantages.
1. The ARTAS Robotic Hair Transplant System
How it works
The ARTAS (Automated Restorative Transplantation System) is one of the most well – known robotic hair transplant machines. It uses advanced imaging technology and robotics to perform the follicular unit extraction (FUE) process. Here’s a step – by – step breakdown of how it works.
Initial Scanning: The machine begins by taking high – resolution images of the patient’s scalp. This detailed scan helps in mapping out the donor area, identifying the location and density of hair follicles. The images are then analyzed by the ARTAS software to create a comprehensive plan for the extraction process.
Follicle Extraction: Once the plan is in place, the robotic arm of the ARTAS system uses a specialized punch tool to extract individual follicular units from the donor area. The arm is highly precise, able to move with millimeter – level accuracy. It can adjust the angle and depth of the punch according to the natural orientation of the hair follicles, minimizing damage to the surrounding tissue.
Transplantation: After extraction, the follicular units are carefully placed into the recipient area by the surgeon. Although the extraction is automated, the transplantation part still requires the skill and expertise of a trained medical professional to ensure natural – looking results.
Pros
High Precision: One of the biggest advantages of the ARTAS system is its precision. The robotic arm can accurately identify and extract follicular units, reducing the risk of damage to the follicles. This results in a higher survival rate of the transplanted hair. For example, in traditional FUE procedures, there is a small chance that the surgeon may accidentally nick or damage a follicle during extraction. With ARTAS, this risk is significantly reduced.
Consistent Results: The machine’s ability to perform the extraction process in a consistent manner ensures that the density and distribution of the transplanted hair are more uniform. This leads to a more natural – looking outcome. Whether it’s the first or the hundredth follicle being extracted, the ARTAS system maintains the same level of accuracy and quality.
Faster Extraction: In some cases, the ARTAS system can complete the follicle extraction process more quickly than a manual FUE procedure. The automated nature of the machine allows it to work continuously without getting tired or fatigued. This can be beneficial for both the patient, who spends less time in the operating room, and the surgeon, who can perform more procedures in a day.
Minimal Scarring: Since the ARTAS system uses a small punch tool for follicle extraction, the resulting scars in the donor area are minimal. The tiny puncture marks left behind are hardly noticeable, especially as the hair grows back. This is a major advantage for patients who are concerned about visible scarring after the procedure.
Cons
High Cost: The ARTAS system is an expensive piece of equipment, and this cost is often passed on to the patient. Hair transplant procedures using ARTAS can be significantly more expensive than traditional manual methods. This high cost may put the treatment out of reach for some patients who are looking for a more affordable hair restoration solution.
Limited Follicle Yield: In some cases, the number of follicles that can be extracted in a single session using the ARTAS system may be limited. This is especially true for patients with extensive hair loss who require a large number of follicles for transplantation. The machine may not be able to meet the high – volume needs of these patients in one sitting, potentially requiring multiple sessions.
Dependency on Technology: As an automated system, the ARTAS machine is highly dependent on technology. Technical glitches or malfunctions can occur, which may disrupt the hair transplant procedure. In such cases, the surgeon may need to halt the operation and wait for the issue to be resolved, causing inconvenience to both the patient and the medical team.
Lack of Human Touch: While the machine offers high precision, it lacks the human touch and intuition that an experienced surgeon brings. In complex cases, a skilled surgeon may be able to make on – the – spot decisions based on visual cues and tactile feedback. The ARTAS system, on the other hand, follows a pre – programmed plan and may not be as adaptable in certain situations.
2. The NeoGraft Robotic Hair Transplant System
How it works
The NeoGraft system is another popular robotic hair transplant machine. It also operates on the principle of follicular unit extraction (FUE) but has its own unique features.
Follicle Identification: Similar to ARTAS, NeoGraft starts by using a special camera to identify the location and quality of hair follicles in the donor area. The system analyzes factors such as hair density, thickness, and the angle of growth.
Automated Extraction: The NeoGraft machine uses a hand – held device that contains a micro – punch. This device is connected to a console that controls the extraction process. The surgeon holds the hand – held device and guides it over the donor area. As the device moves, it automatically extracts follicular units. The extraction process is suction – assisted, which helps in gently removing the follicles from the scalp.
Immediate Transplantation: One of the unique features of NeoGraft is its ability to perform immediate transplantation. After extraction, the follicular units are transferred directly to the recipient area using a specialized implantation tool. This reduces the time that the follicles are out of the body, potentially increasing their survival rate.
Pros
Immediate Transplantation: The ability to transplant the follicles immediately after extraction is a significant advantage of the NeoGraft system. This shortens the overall procedure time and reduces the risk of damage to the follicles during storage. For example, in traditional FUE procedures, the extracted follicles may need to be stored in a nutrient – rich solution for a period before transplantation. With NeoGraft, this storage step is eliminated.
User – Friendly for Surgeons: The NeoGraft system is designed to be relatively easy for surgeons to use. The hand – held extraction device allows for a more natural movement compared to the robotic arm of the ARTAS system. Surgeons who are new to robotic hair transplant technology may find it easier to adapt to the NeoGraft system, as it gives them more control over the extraction process.
Good Follicle Survival Rate: The suction – assisted extraction method used by NeoGraft, combined with the immediate transplantation feature, contributes to a high follicle survival rate. The gentle extraction process minimizes trauma to the follicles, and the quick transplantation ensures that they are implanted in the recipient area while still in optimal condition.
Customizable Settings: The NeoGraft machine offers customizable settings for the extraction process. Surgeons can adjust parameters such as the depth of the punch, the suction force, and the speed of extraction according to the patient’s specific needs. This allows for a more personalized approach to hair transplantation.
Cons
Higher Chance of Inconsistent Extraction: Although the NeoGraft system is designed to be precise, there is a slightly higher chance of inconsistent extraction compared to the ARTAS system. Since the extraction is guided by a surgeon using a hand – held device, there may be some variation in the angle and depth of extraction. This can potentially lead to a less uniform distribution of transplanted hair.
Risk of Suction – Related Complications: The suction – assisted extraction method used by NeoGraft, while effective, also carries a small risk of complications. In rare cases, the suction force may be too strong, causing damage to the surrounding tissue or blood vessels in the donor area. This can lead to bleeding, bruising, or even infection if not properly managed.
Limited Market Penetration: Compared to the ARTAS system, the NeoGraft system has a relatively smaller market share. This means that there may be fewer clinics that offer NeoGraft hair transplant procedures. As a result, patients may have less choice in terms of finding a suitable provider, and the lack of competition may also affect the pricing of the treatment.
Less Advanced Imaging Technology: NeoGraft’s imaging technology for follicle identification is not as advanced as that of the ARTAS system. While it can still accurately identify follicles, the level of detail and analysis provided by ARTAS is often considered superior. This may limit the ability of the NeoGraft system to create a highly detailed and optimized extraction plan in some cases.
Comparison between ARTAS and NeoGraft
Precision
ARTAS generally offers a higher level of precision due to its robotic arm’s ability to move with extreme accuracy. The machine can precisely target and extract follicles, resulting in a more uniform distribution of transplanted hair. NeoGraft, while precise, has a slightly higher chance of inconsistent extraction due to the manual guidance of the hand – held device.
Cost
Both systems are more expensive than traditional manual hair transplant methods. However, the ARTAS system is often considered to be on the higher end of the price spectrum. The high cost of the ARTAS equipment and the associated technology contribute to its relatively expensive treatment fees. NeoGraft, although still costly, may be a more affordable option for some patients.
Follicle Survival Rate
Both ARTAS and NeoGraft have high follicle survival rates. ARTAS achieves this through its precise extraction process, which minimizes damage to the follicles. NeoGraft, on the other hand, combines gentle suction – assisted extraction with immediate transplantation to ensure the viability of the follicles.
Ease of Use for Surgeons
NeoGraft is often considered more user – friendly for surgeons, especially those new to robotic hair transplant technology. The hand – held device gives surgeons more control and a more natural feel during the extraction process. ARTAS, with its complex robotic arm and software – driven operation, may require more training for surgeons to master.
Market Presence
ARTAS has a larger market presence and is more widely recognized in the hair transplant industry. It is offered by many established hair transplant clinics around the world. NeoGraft, while gaining popularity, has a relatively smaller market share, which may limit the availability of the treatment for some patients.
Conclusion
Robotic hair transplant machines, such as the ARTAS and NeoGraft systems, have brought significant advancements to the field of hair restoration. They offer several advantages over traditional manual methods, including higher precision, better follicle survival rates, and in some cases, faster procedures. However, they also come with their own set of drawbacks, such as high costs, potential technical issues, and limitations in follicle yield. When considering a hair transplant, patients should carefully weigh the pros and cons of each system, taking into account their individual needs, budget, and the advice of a qualified hair transplant surgeon. As technology continues to evolve, we can expect further improvements in robotic hair transplant machines, potentially making the procedure more accessible, efficient, and effective in the future.
Related topics:
5 Things To Know About Getting A Second Hair Transplant
Why It’s Not Good to Get a Hair Transplant Too Young – Top Surgeon Warns
