Bit of a worry on my end. I used a dermapen around two years ago and now I’m scared I might’ve done more harm than good. Hoping a doctor might see this.
I microneedled for about 10 months in total. At first I was doing it once a week or every two weeks, then switched to once a month. All up, I did 18 sessions. I used a dermapen at the slowest speed, 1.5mm depth, mostly just around the hairline and the temples.
The thing is, I never really got any redness or pinpoint bleeding like everyone said you should aim for. Not straight away at least. Each session took ages — 20 to 40 minutes — since I had to part my hair, and instead of gliding the pen, I stamped it which made it even longer. Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t like there was a sea of blood or anything, but now I’m worried I might’ve caused some damage, maybe even fibrosis.
Now I’m stressing that this could affect a future hair transplant. Hair still grows in that area but it’s sparse and miniaturised, just like it was before to be fair.
If anyone here has had a transplant after microneedling, how long did you microneedle for? What depth and how often? How long did each session take and what speed was your dermapen on?
I did loads of microneedling on and off for a few years before I had my transplant, probably around 30 to 40 sessions in total. My results turned out great, no issues at all.
Really appreciate the feedback mate. Just wondering, did you do it all over your head or just certain areas? What depth and how often were you doing it? And how long did each session last?
I’m just a bit worried I might’ve gone overboard with it.
I did microneedling as well using a dermapen, probably around 10 sessions. 1.5mm isn’t unusual at all since the recipient sites for the grafts go even deeper than that.
Unless you’re aiming for a really densely packed transplant, I wouldn’t stress too much. Sounds like you might be overthinking it a bit.
Ah right, yeah that makes sense. I was actually aiming for a densely packed transplant myself, not over the top or anything, just enough to properly sort out the hairline. That’s been my main issue and it’s the exact area I was microneedling too.
I had around 45 grafts per square centimetre in the hairline, just to give you a bit of reference.
Why not start with something like that, and if you feel it’s not quite enough, you could always go back for a second transplant later to boost the density?
I get where you’re coming from. Your worry is that the microneedling might have messed things up to the point where you can’t get a solid result, and even a second transplant might be off the table.
But try not to let that fear take over. If the area still grows hair, even if it’s sparse and miniaturised, chances are the skin’s still healthy enough for grafts. A proper surgeon will be able to assess the condition of the scalp and let you know what’s possible.
Might be worth booking a consultation just to get some peace of mind.
It’s actually possible to transplant into scar tissue, assuming you’ve even developed a noticeable amount of it. If you’re really unsure, you could pick up a cheap USB microscope and check your scalp under magnification. That should give you a clearer idea if there’s any scarring going on.
In theory, yeah. They should be able to tell, since they’ve studied skin properly. Personally, I’d rather go see a hair restoration surgeon, ideally one who’s also got a background in dermatology.
There aren’t any close to me sadly. But I reckon a dermatologist who specialises in trichology should be able to tell if there’s any micro fibrosis going on.
What would a hair restoration surgeon actually do differently? Both should be able to tell if there’s any fibrosis. In Italy, dermatologists who specialise in trichology always seem to use a dermatoscope. Just asking for a bit of clarity here, and cheers for all the help by the way.
Yeah, fair point. A hair restoration surgeon would be looking at it from the angle of whether you’re a good candidate for a transplant. A dermatologist who specialises in trichology might not be fully clued up on all the latest hair restoration methods, so they could end up putting you off the idea when actually you might still be fine to go ahead with one.
Yeah you’re right. I don’t reckon I’ve done that much damage to the point where they’d say no chance for a hair transplant. At least I really hope not. Feels a bit far-fetched to think I’ve caused that level of damage, if I’ve even caused any at all.
Yeah, that’s what I’d expect too, but better to be safe than sorry, especially if you’re planning to go in for a lot of grafts and drop a fair bit of money on it.
Do you reckon a dermatologist who’s into trichology would still be good for a consultation?
I’m torn between seeing a dermatologist or a surgeon. I feel like the dermatologist would be better at spotting any fibrosis, don’t you think? The surgeon I’ve looked at doesn’t have a background in dermatology. I sort of see him more like a mechanic, the best of the lot of course, but still more hands-on than diagnostic.