# **Lippincott Journal Portfolio Author Permission Guidelines**

permissions@lww.com

# **ARTICLES**

Please see options available for **non-profit** and **non-commercial** reuses below. All requests to reuse your Final Published Article must be submitted via RightsLink and reviewed by Lippincott's Permissions Team. To learn how to submit a request via RightsLink, please visit: How to Request Permission.

## WHAT IS A FINAL PEER-REVIEWED MANUSCRIPT?

## WHAT IS A FINAL PUBLISHED ARTICLE?

![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1097%E2%98%8Ddss.0000000000003881/_page_0_Figure_6.jpeg)

Please see options available for non-profit and non-commercial reuses below. All requests to reuse content must be submitted via RightsLink and reviewed by Lippincott's Permissions Team. To learn how to submit a request via RightsLink, please visit: How to Request Permission.

![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1097%E2%98%8Ddss.0000000000003881/_page_0_Figure_8.jpeg)

#### Proper attribution to License: Permission is required the original publication **CC BY** to reuse content is required. If you modify or alter Proper attribution to License: Permission is required the content for reuse, it the original publication must be published under to reuse content **CC BY SA** is required. the same license. The borrowed content Proper attribution to License: Permission is required may not be distributed if the original publication to reuse content the content is modified **CC BY ND** is required. or altered. The content may not be Proper attribution to used for commercial License: Permission is required the original publication purposes. to reuse content **CC BY NC** Only non-commercial is required. reuses are permitted. The content may not be If you modify or alter Proper attribution to used for commercial License: Permission is required the content for reuse, it the original publication purposes. **CC BY NC SA** to reuse content must be published under is required. Only non-commercial the same license. reuses are permitted. The content may not be The borrowed content Proper attribution to used for commercial License:

the original publication purposes. **CC BY NC ND** the content is modified to reuse content is required. Only non-commercial or altered. reuses are permitted.

Permission is required

If your type of use is not listed, submit a request via RightsLink or email permissions@lww.com.

# WHAT IS OPEN **ACCESS?**

Open Access is the free, immediate, online access for any online user. It is digital, scholarly material published in peer-reviewed journals.

# **HOW CAN I USE MY ARTICLE IF IT IS OPEN ACCESS?**

Certain reuses can be limited depending on the type of license your article is published under. To learn more about license types, and

how they influence your reuses please see the corresponding chart to the left or visit the following link: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/

> Click here for a printable version of this document

# Please refer to your Copyright Transfer Agreement before applying to use content in a new source.

may not be distributed if

\*Lippincott will permit the author to deposit a final peer-reviewed manuscript on his/her personal website, university's institutional repository or employer's intranet only after twelve months have passed from the article's publication date. The final peer-reviewed manuscript may not be updated or replaced with a proof of the final article. The final peer-reviewed manuscript must appear alongside the following notice: "This is a non-final version of an article published in final form in (provide complete journal citation)." Upon NIH request, it remains the legal responsibility of the author to confirm with NIH the provenance of his/her manuscript for purposes of deposit. Author may not deposit articles him/herself. The final peer-reviewed manuscript already transmitted to NIH may not be altered. To learn more: NIH Public Access Policy. Lippincott policy prohibits posting articles and portions of articles on social networking websites. To learn more about options available for sharing your article in line with copyright law, please visit <u>http://www.howcanishareit.com/</u>.

![](https://assets.reachrx.ai/images/10.1097%E2%98%8Ddss.0000000000003881/_page_0_Picture_20.jpeg)

### Copyright © 2017 | Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. | All rights reserved. | Updated January 2018

Dermatologic Surgery

<jats:sec>
            <jats:title>BACKGROUND</jats:title>
            <jats:p>Follicular unit excision is a favored minimally invasive hair transplantation method. However, it is suboptimal for many patients of African descent because of wide variations in hair and skin characteristics.</jats:p>
          </jats:sec>
          <jats:sec>
            <jats:title>OBJECTIVE</jats:title>
            <jats:p>To evaluate the performance of a skin-responsive follicular unit excision device, which accommodates hair curliness, skin thickness, and firmness in patients of African descent.</jats:p>
          </jats:sec>
          <jats:sec>
            <jats:title>MATERIALS AND METHODS</jats:title>
            <jats:p>The authors retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent scalp follicular unit (FU) excision using a skin-responsive technique at 7 multinational clinics. The preoperative donor grading for the anticipated difficulty used a scale with Class V indicating the highest degree of hair curliness, skin thickness, and firmness.</jats:p>
          </jats:sec>
          <jats:sec>
            <jats:title>RESULTS</jats:title>
            <jats:p>Of 64 eligible patients (45 males and 19 females), 28 had Class V FU excision donor grades. The mean transection rate for all patients was 3%–6%, which was highest in class V patients. Skin thickness and firmness had a greater effect on the maximum transection rate than hair curliness. Only 19 or 18 G punches were used.</jats:p>
          </jats:sec>
          <jats:sec>
            <jats:title>CONCLUSION</jats:title>
            <jats:p>The authors report consistence success of a new skin-responsive FU excision device for all patients of African descent with a mean graft transection rate of less than 10%. The findings support skin thickness and firmness as major influencers of graft attrition rate.</jats:p>
          </jats:sec>

Donor harvesting: follicular unit excision

J Cutan Aesthet Surg

A new universal follicular unit excision classification system for hair transplantation difficulty and patient outcome

Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol

Advances and challenges in hair restoration of curly Afrocentric hair

Dermatol Clin

Technical considerations for follicular unit extraction in African-American hair

Dermatol Surg

Comparative study of a novel tool for follicular unit extraction for individuals with Afro-textured hair

Plast Reconstr Surg—Glob Open

Follicular unit excision punches and devices

Common dermatologic procedures and the associated complications unique to skin of color

Follicular unit extraction: minimally invasive surgery for hair transplantation

Transection rate at different areas of scalp during follicular unit extraction/excision (FUE)

J Cosmet Dermatol

The impact of recent events on human genetic diversity

Philos Trans R Soc B: Biol Sci

A novel follicular unit excision device for all-purpose hair graft harvesting

New methodology and instrumentation for follicular unit extraction: lower follicle transection rates and expanded patient candidacy

Robotic follicular unit extraction in hair transplantation

Racial disparities in dermatology

Arch Dermatol Res

The use of non-invasive instruments in characterizing human facial and abdominal skin

Lasers Surg Med

Follicular unit excision is a favored minimally invasive hair transplantation method. However, it is suboptimal for many patients of African descent because of wide variations in hair and skin characteristics.
To evaluate the performance of a skin-responsive follicular unit excision device, which accommodates hair curliness, skin thickness, and firmness in patients of African descent.
The authors retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent scalp follicular unit (FU) excision using a skin-responsive technique at 7 multinational clinics. The preoperative donor grading for the anticipated difficulty used a scale with Class V indicating the highest degree of hair curliness, skin thickness, and firmness.
Of 64 eligible patients (45 males and 19 females), 28 had Class V FU excision donor grades. The mean transection rate for all patients was 3%-6%, which was highest in class V patients. Skin thickness and firmness had a greater effect on the maximum transection rate than hair curliness. Only 19 or 18 G punches were used.
The authors report consistence success of a new skin-responsive FU excision device for all patients of African descent with a mean graft transection rate of less than 10%. The findings support skin thickness and firmness as major influencers of graft attrition rate.

Follicular Unit Excision in Patients of African Descent: A Skin-Responsive Technique.

Follicular Unit Excision in Patients of African Descent: A Skin-Responsive Technique

Follicular Unit Excision in Patients of African Descent: A Skin-Responsive Technique

Clinical Summary

What was studied

Key findings

Study limitations

Clinical implications

Related Questions