Live from ISHRS 2010 Meeting in Boston — ACell Discussion
Hi Doctor,
I am assuming you’re attending the ISHRS meeting and was hoping you could attend the ACell discussion to report your opinion on your blog. Here’s the press release that caught my eye: MatriStem in Hair Restoration at Annual Scientific Meeting
Thanks
I’m actually in Boston at the International Society for Hair Restoration (ISHRS) Scientific Meeting, and wrote this on my little netbook to get you a timely response.
The ACell material is reportedly derived from Porcine urinary bladder. Here’s a good, short description of ACell’s product from another conference they attended: “MatriStem® devices are a naturally occurring, completely resorbable, acellular, extracellular matrix. Different collagens, bioactive components and intact basement membrane help surgical sites remodel by supporting the growth of new blood vessels, connective tissue and muscle.”
At the ISHRS meeting, two doctors presented its use in plucked hairs. Hairs were plucked out of the beard or side hair and amongst these hairs the best ones were identified. The ACell was applied to the plucked hairs and then placed into recipient sites. Some of these hairs grew (less than 50%), but the good news is that supposedly the site where the hair was plucked also grew out a hair. The data is very sketchy and there is clearly no well identified process — no right way or wrong way to do this. But in theory, new hairs come from the process. If what was presented is accurate, then the dream of something for nothing (hairs that are essentially replicated) produces more hair than what was there prior to the procedure.
This MicroMatrix has experience of use in keloids, other types of wounds, and in the treatment of lacerations, ulcers of the skin (diabetic and vascular in origin), and burns. From what was presented, a great deal of interest was generated, but there is much research that needs to be done before it can or should be offered to the public. I suspect that the research will be on the fast track as many doctors saw the opportunity to make more hairs than they started with.
Wow this is amazing, if more research goes into using Matristem with plucked hairs, we might not need to wait 5-10 years for a cure.
Doc, where did you get that ‘less than 50%’ number? Both Cooley and Hitzig have quoted me 60-80% regrowth.
Well guys maybe something great will come soon in a few years but I really hope so! Chances aren’t high but you never know!
Hi Dr. Rassman,
Was there any news regarding Aderans at the conference? If I’m not mistaken, I think their lead scientist, Kurt Stenn, was supposed to give a presentation.
They usually don’t give out any meaningful info (5-10 years, etc.) but I’m still curious if there were any new developments during the clinical trial.
Thanks a lot.
I wonder if the ‘less than 50%’ is in the doc’s own estimation from the photos. But it’s not accurate based on what I’ve been told by the actual researchers. Doc, please clarify.
And I love how the doc stresses that in THEORY new hairs are made, even though Cooley has PROVEN it in his experiments and is now offering it as a regular part of his procedures. Sounds to be like someone’s trying to marginalize a huge scientific breakthrough.
Assuming the hairs were “plucked” in the layman’s sense of the term, why wouldn’t the original site grow back? I know if you pluck the same site repeatedly over a long period of time the follicle can stop working but one time almost certainly shouldn’t cause permanent hair loss, no?
What I’m dubious about is whether the recipient site would grow another hair after the transplant finishes its current cycle. I’m unsure from this summary whether they confirmed this. I mean big deal, your hair and nails continue to grow after you die but that doesn’t hold in the long term.
James, what more do you want. The doc never post comments on this website on weekends, as im sure he has a life! Yes, he is always skeptical of new treatments, by why wouldn’t he be, because so many supposed ‘new breakthroughs’ have so far failed.
This new technique looks really promising, but all the doc is saying is lets just wait and see until it is further proven.
If you were 100% confident that this method is going to work guaranteed, then you wouldn’t be on this site asking the Dr Rassman for his opinion.
Relax James. I’m waiting patiently too and I understand how the doc doesn’t want to give out false hope. I’m sure more will be revealed over coming months :)
Dr. Rassman, what kind of proof, or evidence, was presented to support those claims?
thanx
James, this is a procedure that is already being offered by Cooley?
Yes
What about your before and after photographs please James ;)
That’s the proof I want…
Look I’m a Cooley patient myself and I’ll go back for more at some point.. I’m just saying wait for the real press release – when it happens it happens. I love Cooleys work but I also respect why the Doc here doesn’t go crazy each time something new comes out. That said I did find myself thinking last week how cool it’d be if Rassman asked Cooley to do an interview for this site. Doc would you be able to do some deeper digging for us?
I have listened to Cooley’s interview, and I am positively surprised:
-he says he is going to document it with macro photographs, and biopsies of the new follicles.
-he is now begining to make “pluck tests” on the transplanted follicles to see if they can cycle.
All in all, Cooley seems pretty reasonable and credible.
Most probably, the hairs won’t cycle, (this is my guess), but Cooley seems to be determined to test this, and to document everything, so I have no objection in giving him some time to do these tests.
I just don’t understand why Hitzig and Acell have behaved like pathological liars before.
James what are you talking about! On Dr. Jerry Cooley’s site he dosen’t talk about Acell. Hit me a link!
Hey Spanish Dude
Why do you assume that the plucked hairs will not cycle again? Dr. Cooley stated multiple times in his interview that he was optimistic that the hairs will be long lasting and permanent.
Spanish Dude, there is no physiological reason why the hair wouldn’t cycle. Cooley is only being conservative because he has no proof yet. But he is clear, and it makes sense, that a fully formed follicle (which has been confirmed via biopsy) would cycle hairs just like any other follicle would.
@Khalil and James:
Sorry, I didn’t understand completely the audio.
Thanks to Khalil’s transcript, now I see that Cooley has in fact already biopsied these replicated follicles, and he says that they look normal. I am now more optimistic about the cycling issue.
well I think the answer is simple no 100% regrowth. It might be round about 70% but the the hairs will be long lasting and permanent….