I'm thinking about getting an FUE hair transplant, what is the difference between the ARTAS robot and the Neograft?
Doctor Answers 16
The ARTAS robotic FUE system is more precise than Neograft
On the other hand, the Neograft machine is manually operated and so is far less precise. It uses sharp edge dissection which contributes to increased transection of the grafts. Additionally, the Neograft uses dry air suction to remove the grafts from the scalp. This process adds another risk factor to the survivability of the grafts because once they are removed from the scalp, the grafts become vulnerable to desiccation (drying out). The suction also adds the possibility of mechanical trauma as the grafts are sucked into a tube and then pushed out of the tube (by forced air) into the recipient sites.
ARTAS vs NeoGraft
The ARTAS Robotic Hair Transplant system uses 2 stereoscopic cameras, complex computer algorithms, a 6-jointed robotic arm, and 5,000 times per second the computer updates its position as it extracts each hair with robotic efficiency. The robot is controlled by a surgeon, and eliminates the human error inherent in any FUE procedure using any hand-held FUE device on the market, including the NeoGraft drill. With robotic efficiency, the ARTAS system decreases the transection of the grafts during their removal from the scalp. Transection of grafts is a major problem with hand-held devices, and contributes to poor growth, particularly in inexperienced hands.
Most importantly, however, the experience of the physician and his or her dedication to the field of hair restoration is critical. The name of a device does not guarantee perfect results, any more than the very best tennis racket with the very best brand name will make you a tennis pro. A surgeon who recently added "NeoGraft" to a laundry list of other cosmetic procedures is most likely not experienced in the hundreds of subtleties and nuances of hair restoration, and that may be evident in the results, which are of course permanent.
You might also like...
The difference is close to 300 patents
Having lots experience with both ARTAS and Neograft, the biggest difference is that Neograft is another manual system whereas ARTAS is a very precise robot which is consistent and reliable in harvesting. The ARTAS system also uses a blunt punch after a sharp score so there is nothing sharp under the skin which can risk the follicles. For this reason, I have harvested up to 7 haired follicular units with the smallest 19G (aprox 1mm) ARTAS punches. I can also use my ARTAS system to create a 3D scan of my patients head and use it to make recipient sites as well as harvest excellent grafts. Ultimately, as some of my colleagues have mentioned, the technology is just one aspect of a good result, experience with the technology is the other. Make sure your hair restoration surgeon has vast experience and good aesthetic design. If you are considering hairline restoration, have your doctor draw a proposed hairline on you, because neither neograft or ARTAS will do that! The best and worst thing about hair restoration is that it is permanent.
What is the difference between ARTAS and Neograft?
There are many hand held motorized devices to perform FUE procedures. Neograft is a hand held motorized device that has vacuum to assist in the removal of the cored follicles. Vacuum suction can be a significant risk for drying and desiccation of the harvested grafts. Desiccation can lead to no growth.
ARTAS robotic FUE is a state of the art robotic system where a two camera imaging serves as the eyes that scans the donor field accurately determining precise exit angles, density of follicles, and hair density per follicle. The sophisticated algorithms function as the brains and dictate the best approach the selected follicles which are laser targeted for extraction. The robotic arm houses two needle system that permits the scoring of the follicle with a sharp punch that dissects the follicle to the level of the dermis. The second needle is a blunt needle, this subsequently cores the remainder to the follicle to free it from the scalp.
While the Neograft hand held system is completely operator dependent, it is subject to physical tiring of the operator. The ARTAS robot is under the control of the operating surgeon but through an user interface, robots do not fatigue so the extractions are consistently extracted without fatigue of the surgeon no matter whether it is the first or the 2000th graft.
Bernardino A. Arocha, MD
ARTAS Robot vs. Neograft
The Neograft is extracted by hand, therefore can be more painful. The precision of extraction may also be affected when done manually. Hair follicles can be damaged, which will result with no growth. This would only be recommended as a last resort, if a patient is not a candidate for the robotic hair restoration procedure.
The difference between Artas and Neograft
A. Both produce FUEs
2. Differences between Artas and Neograft:
A. Artas is a very sophisticated robot designed only to harvest the best FUEs in a consistent manner.
B. With neograft, it is a hand held device that risks human fatigue while the robot does not tire.
C. Artas harvests only from the back of the scalp while neograft can be used to harvest from off scalp areas like the beard or body.
D. The Artas suites can help make recipient sites and stimulate hairlines for your patient.
They are similar but at the different level
One is a robot the other is a hand held instrument
Neograft is an instrument a human (doctor) uses to take out the graft using human skills. Surgical skill and hand eye coordination is needed for this.
These are just tools available to doctors and not the complete solution in hair transplant surgery.
A good doctor can do the FUE without the ARTAS or Neograft. It is just that these tools are well advertised on the Internet and it attracts patients with their technology. Many great doctors perform FUE without the use of ARTAS or Neograft, but they may have them at their disposal as one of their many instruments.
What is the difference between the ARTAS and the Neograft systems
All FUE procedures when performed with a good instrument and a highly skilled operator should be equal. We invented the FUE and have been doing it since 1996. We published the first articles on FUE and introduced the technique into the field at medical meetings and through peer reviewed journals. We also invented the technology behind the ARTAS which we patented before the ARTAS was ever conceived. We licensed this technology to the company that built the ARTAS. As we have this system, I guess that this makes us an expert on the FUE and well qualified to make judgments. We have used the Neograft in our office and with our skill set, it worked perfectly. We have also invented many different types of instruments for FUE, some of which we did not patent but made it into the market. Since we offer both manual and ARTAS robotic FUE to our patients, we have no preference and will go with whatever technology that our patients select.
These answers are for educational purposes and should not be relied upon as a substitute for medical advice you may receive from your physician. If you have a medical emergency, please call 911. These answers do not constitute or initiate a patient/doctor relationship.