Hair Transplant Blog

Home » Hair Transplant Blog

Is Lgr5 Gene Discovery a Hair Cloning Breakthrough?

October 21st, 2009

Q: I heard about the Lgr5 gene being a breakthrough in hair cloning. What’s the latest on that?

A: Many scientists feel that adult stem cells house the answer to cloning (regeneration) of hair follicles. One of the problems of hair cloning, however, is that the cells, once duplicated, “forget” that they are hair follicle cells.

It has recently been discovered that the Lgr5 gene, located in stem cells, appears to contain the “global marker” present in all adult hair follicles. If Lgr5 gene is the “calling card” of the cell, it may carry the cell lineage and shoulder the responsibility of signaling to surrounding stem cells what they are actually supposed to do as they multiply.

Recent experiments have shown that these Lgr5 cells maintain the cells ability to differentiate as hair follicles after many generations of being multiplied in the test tube and, therefore, have the potential of serving as the building blocks of entire new hair follicles. The successful exploitation of this gene would eliminate a major barrier to cloning hair.

Reference
Haegebarth A, Clevers H: Wnt signaling, lgr5, and stem cells in the intestine and skin. Am J Pathol. 2009 Mar; 174(3):715-21.

For more on how hair cloning works, visit the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration page on hair cloning.

Posted by Robert M. Bernstein M.D. at 12:37 pm

Does Low Level Laser Therapy Effect Hair Loss in Men and Women Differently?

October 19th, 2009

Q: Have there been any studies showing the difference between men and women in their response to laser treatments for hair loss?

A: In the International Journal of Cosmetic Surgery and Aesthetic Dermatology (Vol. 5, Number 2; 2003), a study on low level laser therapy (LLLT) was conducted which indicated that there was a 55% increase of growth (hair count) in the temporal area as well as 64% in the vertex of the female subjects who were treated with LLLT for hair loss. The study also indicated a 74% increase in the hair counts of the male subjects in the temporal area and 120% in the vertex region. These results would initially indicate that LLLT works better in men than in women, but there were four times as many men in this study so the results might be different in a larger test group.

However, even in this notably smaller female group, the tensile strength of the hair increased dramatically over the tensile strength observed in the male subjects after treatment. This would indicate that, at least in this study, there was not only an increased hair count in women, but the tensile strength of that hair was greatly improved as well. This would be initially indicative that LLLT may be found to be more beneficial to women than to men.

It is important to note that this study was published in 2003. Further studies need to be conducted to confirm the initial results and to further elucidate the possible mechanisms of low level laser light therapy in both men and women with alopecia. As important, long term data needs to be accumulated to show the continued efficacy of this treatment. It had been our clinical experience that LLLT is not as effective as one would assume from the results of the initial studies.

Visit the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration page on Laser Therapy for more information on the topic, or read more on laser therapy at the Hair Transplant Blog.

Topic: Laser Therapy

Tags: Alopecia / Crown / Hair Count / Hair Loss / Hair loss in Men / Hair Loss in Women / Laser Therapy / Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) / Medical Research / Tensile Strength of Hair

Posted by Robert M. Bernstein M.D. at 2:14 pm

Is Genetic Test for Hair Loss Worthwhile?

October 14th, 2009

Q: Is it worth getting the genetic test for balding?

A: You’re referring to Hair DX (hairdx.com), which costs about $150 and came to market in January of 2008 as the first test for androgenetic alopecia, aka male pattern baldness.

The test screens for variations in the androgen receptor gene on the X chromosome, the gene that is associated with male pattern hair loss. The purpose of the test is to identify persons at increased risk of developing hair loss before it is clinically apparent – so that medical intervention can be started early, when it is most effective.

It is important to realize that, at this point, there is just an association with this gene and hair loss; the cause and effect has not been proven and the association is not anywhere near 100%. A danger is that patients may overreact to the relatively incomplete information that the test provides. It is best to have the test performed under a doctor’s supervision, so that it can be put in the context of other information that the physician gleans through a careful history, physical and a densitometry hair evaluation. As of this posting, genetic testing for hair loss is not permitted in New York State.

Topic: Genetics

Tags: Androgen Receptor / Androgenetic Alopecia / Densitometry / Genetic Test for Hair Loss / Hair DX Genetic Test / Hair Loss / Male Pattern Baldness / Male Pattern Hair Loss / New York / X Chromosome

Posted by Robert M. Bernstein M.D. at 2:14 pm

Areas of Unethical Behavior Practiced Today

October 6th, 2009

Note from Dr. Bernstein: This article, by my colleague Dr. Rassman, is such important reading for anyone considering a hair transplant, that I felt it should be posted in its entirety on the Hair Transplant Blog.

Areas of Unethical Behavior Practiced Today
William Rassman, MD, Los Angeles, California

I am disturbed that there is a rise in unethical practices in the hair transplant community. Although many of these practices have been around amongst a small handful of physicians, the recent recession has clearly increased their numbers. Each of us can see evidence of these practices as patients come into our offices and tell us about their experiences. When a patient comes to me and is clearly the victim of unethical behavior I can only react by telling the patient the truth about what my fellow physician has done to them. We have no obligation to protect those doctors in our ranks who practice unethically, so maybe the way we respond is to become a patient advocate, one on one, for each patient so victimized. The following reflects a list of the practices I find so abhorrent:

1. Selling hair transplants to patients who do not need it, just to make money. I have met with an increasing number of very young patients getting hair transplants for changes in the frontal hairline that reflect a maturing hairline, not balding. Also, performing surgery on very young men (18-22) with early miniaturization is in my opinion outside the “Standard of Care”. Treating these young men with a course of approved medications for a full year should be the Standard of Care for all of us.

2. Selling and delivering more grafts than the patient needs. Doctors are tapping the well of the patient’s graft account by adding hundreds or thousands of grafts into areas of the scalp where the miniaturization is minimal and balding is not grossly evident. I have even seen patients that had grafts placed into areas of the scalp where there was no clinically significant miniaturization present. Can you imagine 3,000-4,000 grafts in an early Class 3 balding pattern? Unwise depletion of a patient’s finite donor hair goes on far more frequently than I can say.

3. Putting grafts into areas of normal hair under the guise of preventing hair loss. There are many patients who have balding in the family and watch their own “hair fall” thinking that most of their hair will eventually fall out. A few doctors prey on these patients and actually offer hair transplantation on a preventive basis. This is far more common in women who may not be as familiar with what causes baldness and do not have targeted support systems like this forum. They become more and more desperate over time and are willing to do “anything” to get hair. They are a set-up for physicians with predatory practice styles.

4. Pushing the number of grafts that are not within the skill set of surgeon and/or staff. The push to large megasessions and gigasessions are driven by a limited number of doctors who can safely perform these large sessions. Competitive forces in the marketplace make doctors feel that they must offer the large sessions, even if they can not do them effectively. A small set of doctors promote large sessions of hair transplants, but really do not deliver them, fraudulently collecting fees for services not received by the patient. Fraud is a criminal offense and when we see these patients in consultation, I ask you to consider your obligation under our oaths and our respective state medical board license agencies to report these doctors.

5. Some doctors are coloring the truth with regard to their results, using inflated graft counts, misleading photos, or inaccurate balding classifications. False representation occurs not only to patients while the doctor is selling his skills, but also to professionals in the field when the doctor presents his results. Rigging patient results and testimonials are not uncommon. Lifestyle Lift, a cosmetic surgery company settled a claim by the State of New York over its attempts to produce positive consumer reviews publishing statements on Web sites faking the voices of satisfied customers. Employee of this company reportedly produced substantial content for the web.

The hair transplant physician community has developed wonderful technology that could never have been imagined 20 years ago. The results of modern hair transplantation have produced many satisfied patients and the connection between what we represent to our patient and what we can realistically do is impressive today. Unfortunately, a small handful of physicians have developed predatory behavior that is negatively impacting all of us and each of us sees this almost daily in our practices. Writing an opinion piece like this is not a pleasant process, but what I have said here needs to be said. According to the American Medical Association Opinion 9.031- “Physicians have an ethical obligation to report impaired, incompetent, and/or unethical colleagues in accordance with the legal requirements in each state……”

Rassman, WR: Areas of unethical behavior practiced today. Hair Transplant Forum Intl. Sep/Oct 2009; 19(5) 1,153.

Topic: Ethics

Tags: Consultation / Donor Hair / Ethical Medical Practices / Fees / Grafts / Hair Loss / Hair Transplant Physician / Hair Transplant Physician Community / Hair Transplantation / Hairline / Megasessions / Miniaturization / Standard of Care / Unethical Medical Practices

Posted by Robert M. Bernstein M.D. at 2:15 pm

Is Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) a Viable Hair Restoration Treatment?

October 5th, 2009

Q: There has been a lot of talk circulating on the internet regarding the use of Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP) for the treatment of hair loss. Would you be able to comment on whether or not you think this will turn out to be a viable treatment for male pattern baldness (MPB)?

A: It is a bit too early to tell. My sense is that it will not have any practical long-term benefits for the treatment of hair loss (MPB), since it doesn’t get to the cause of androgenetic hair loss, i.e. DHT. Treatments such as copper-peptide, saw-palmetto, laser therapy, have all been promoted for male pattern hair loss, but have not really turned out to have any significant long-term benefits. Further studies need to be done on PRP to get a better sense of its value in combating hair loss.

On the other hand, PRP can have a significant impact on wound healing and it is possible that it may be useful in promoting healing after a hair transplant in both the donor and recipient areas of the scalp.

For further reading, see the Bernstein Medical – Center for Hair Restoration web page on Platelet Rich Plasma (PRP).