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

The ARTAS robotic system allows for very precise extraction of follicular units from the donor area through the use of robotic arm movement guided by video-imaging. It also uses an advanced two-step sharp/blunt dissection technique. This technology allows the harvesting of grafts with minimal transection (damage) to the follicles being transplanted. Since a damaged follicle may not survive the transplant process, extracting them as cleanly as possible is key to having optimal hair transplant results. Once the ARTAS robot dissects the grafts from the scalp, they are carefully removed and placed into a holding solution before they are safely inserted into recipient sites.

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.


New York Dermatologic Surgeon
5.0 out of 5 stars 3 reviews

ARTAS vs NeoGraft

The NeoGraft device is essentially a hand-held dental drill with a sharp, circular punch, and utilizes a single-stage sharp punch dissection.  A person (usually a technician) uses their vision and their hands in an effort is made to try to extract each graft manually.  Each graft harvest attempt with the NeoGraft device is accompanied by inherent human error that we all posses.  There are several hand held FUE devices on the market, including a 50 cent 1mm dermal biopsy punch.  All have the common thread of being hand held, and entirely dependent on the technician using the hand-held device.  

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.

Ken Anderson, MD
Atlanta Hair Restoration Surgeon
5.0 out of 5 stars 129 reviews

FUE tools

ARTAS and Neograft are FUE tools used to complete FUE.  Sometimes you need both , sometimes you need one.  It all depends on the head and the complexity of the case.  

Rashid M. Rashid, PhD, MD
Houston Dermatologist
4.5 out of 5 stars 8 reviews

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. 

Justin Rome, MD
Los Angeles Hair Restoration Surgeon
5.0 out of 5 stars 1 review

What is the difference between ARTAS and Neograft?

hairguynyc,

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.


Sincerely,

Bernardino A. Arocha, MD

Bernardino Arocha, MD
Houston Hair Restoration Surgeon
5.0 out of 5 stars 8 reviews

ARTAS Robot vs. Neograft

The ARTAS Robotic Hair Restoration procedure allows for a truly minimally invasive solution to deliver permanent and incredibly natural looking results. It is also scar-free, and is virtually painless!
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.

Jack Kolenda, MD, FRCS (C)
Mississauga Facial Plastic Surgeon
2.3 out of 5 stars 3 reviews

The difference between Artas and Neograft

1. Similarities 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. 

Omeed Memar, MD, PhD
Chicago Dermatologic Surgeon
4.9 out of 5 stars 32 reviews

They are similar but at the different level

I have been at the forefront of the Neograft and ARTAS procedures having adopted them from the get-co. We started Neograft 7 years ago right after approval by the FDA and my ARTAS robot was one of the first in the world. For the difference - if money is not an issue robot is better hands down. It is faster, more precise, robotic site making is preserving more existing hairs etc. However in experienced hands (we have done hundreds of cases ) Neograft is holding ground as comparable procedure. Like I tell my patients - there are automatic and manual cars - both get you where you want but most people pay more to get automatic because of the advantages. Come in for a consult to discuss this in detail. These are just the  machines and at the end it s the doctor and the team that makes the difference

One is a robot the other is a hand held instrument

ARTAS is a robot that harvest the graft using computerized sighting and automation. No surgical skill is needed for this. Any doctor with a degree can buy the ARTAS and start harvesting grafts. Transplanting them and having results is another story.

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.

Jae Pak, MD
Los Angeles Hair Restoration Surgeon
4.9 out of 5 stars 85 reviews

What is the difference between the ARTAS and the Neograft systems

The ARTAS system is truly a robot which was designed to take out the variables of the operator while coring the grafts. Results from the coring are predictable and replicable. The ARTAS robot does not remove the grafts/The Neograft offers a unique coring system that uses a drill in combination with a suction system to extract the grafts so the Neograft does two steps on the FUE process while the ARTAS does only one step. The Neograft is not a robot like the ARTAS and requires an operator to perform the FUE while the ARTAS is set up by the doctors with all of the needed perimeters, and then runs fairly automatically. The variable of operator dependence is critical for the Neograft and if the operators are not skilled, the quality of the FUE is not as predictable as with the ARTAS.

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.

William Rassman, MD
Los Angeles Hair Restoration Surgeon
5.0 out of 5 stars 27 reviews

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.