What counts as a realistic result depends on your donor supply, the extent of loss being treated, and your hair type, not a single expected outcome that applies to every patient. This site does not publish a graft-survival or success percentage anywhere, including here, because we have not verified one against a clinical source we can name. See /asian-hair/ for the specific premise this applies to.
Clinics quote survival and success figures constantly, and those figures are rarely tied to a published method or an independent check. Rather than repeat one, this page describes what actually determines your result (donor density, hair type, and the plan) and leaves the number out until we have one we can defend.
Refusing to quote one number is only useful if we hand over the ones that do exist. These are they.
| What | Published figure | When |
|---|---|---|
| Swelling of the forehead | Nearly half of patients | Day 1–2, peaks day 2–3, gone by day 5–7 |
| Swelling around the eyes | About 3–5% | Same window |
| Folliculitis | 12.1% | Usually weeks 1–4 |
| Numbness | About 2% | Resolves within 4–8 months |
| Pain | 6% pooled, for FUE | Early |
| Infection | Below 1% in most studies | Early |
| Shedding around the grafts | 0.15–15% reported; 3.7% in a 621-patient series, 20.9% among the women in it | Weeks 2–8, regrowth from ~3 months |
| When the result is mature | — | About 12 months; a second session is advised only after that |
Romera de Blas C, Vega Díez D, Ricart Vayá JM, Gómez Zubiaur A. Complications in follicular unit excision hair transplantation: current evidence and practical approaches. Frontiers in Medicine. 2026;13:1750989, doi:10.3389/fmed.2026.1750989 (https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/medicine/articles/10.3389/fmed.2026.1750989/full), measured 2026-07-29. The 621-patient shedding figures are Okochi H, Onda M, Momosawa A, Okochi M, Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2024;48:1258–1263 (PMID 37816944), also cited on the shock loss page.
Notice what that table is and is not. Every row is a complication rate, something that either happened or did not, counted afterwards by someone who published their method. There is no row for how well the grafts took, because nobody we could find has published that in a form we can check. The asymmetry is the point: the profession measures its complications and estimates its successes.
A transplant redistributes hair; it does not create any. So the honest ceiling is set by your donor area, and the published arithmetic is unforgiving: roughly 10 to 15 follicular units per cm² can be taken in one safe pass, and 40 to 50 FU/cm² must be left behind or the back of your head becomes the visible problem instead. The donor capacity page runs the whole sum.
Two consequences worth setting expectations against. Density will be lower than your original. A good result reads as coverage under normal light, not as the head you had before, and any plan promising the latter is spending donor supply it does not have. And pattern loss continues after surgery: grafted hair is taken from a zone that resists it, but the native hair around it is not, so a plan that does not reserve grafts for future loss has quietly assumed your hair loss has finished. See the Norwood scale for why that assumption is usually wrong.