FUE and DHI are not fundamentally different surgical methods — both are FUE-based procedures. What people call “DHI” usually refers to using a specific tool (the Choi implanter pen) during implantation. The outcome depends far more on surgeon skill, team experience, graft care and patient selection than on whether a Choi pen or forceps were used.
History & marketing: how a tool became a “method”
The Choi implant pen was introduced to allow the simultaneous creation of a micro-channel and insertion of the graft. Clinics and marketers framed DHI as a distinct “method,” but technically it is the same extraction technique (FUE) with a different implantation instrument. Many respected clinicians and clinics describe DHI as “an updated version of FUE” or “FUE + Choi pen.” In short: DHI = FUE extraction + Choi implant.
Does the Choi pen itself change the biological outcome?
Studies and expert reports show that implanter pens do not systematically damage grafts when used correctly; graft survival depends on many handling variables. In practice, implanters may offer advantages for angle/depth control in skilled hands, but they are not a guarantee of better survival or a better natural look by themselves.
Who are the real drivers for a successful hair transplants?
The surgeon’s skill and judgment, a planning a right hairline, the placing of the grafts at the correct angle & density, choosing high quality of tools, the minimizing transection are the factors for a natural and successful hair transplantation.
Experienced surgeons make better long-term aesthetic choices. Trained surgical team & technicians — extraction speed and careful graft handling (hydration, temperature, and time out of body) are crucial. Hair transplants are team procedures.
Graft handling and storage — how grafts are cooled, buffered, and how long they stay outside the body affects survival.
Patient’s age, donor density/quality, medical history, smoking, medications, and expectations are the affecting factors as well.
Technique consistency — small differences in incision size, depth control, and trauma matter — and those are skills, not gadgets.
Because these factors dominate outcomes, two clinics using the same implanter can produce very different results if the teams’ skills differ. Conversely, a highly skilled team can get excellent results using forceps and pre-made slits, or using implanter pens.
Pros & cons: Choi implanter vs. FUE implantation
Choi Implanter (DHI-style) — potential advantages
Precise control over angle, direction and depth in the hands of an experienced operator
Can be useful in small, delicate areas or when existing native hair must be preserved
Choi implanter — potential downsides
Slower (because grafts are loaded individually), which can increase graft time-out if the team isn’t organized.
More staff and careful workflow are needed to avoid ischemia/longer graft out-of-body time.
FUE with pre-made slits + forceps — potential advantages
Faster implantation with skilled technicians for large sessions (when a big team places grafts rapidly into pre-made sites)
Less handling per graft if the team is well drilled, possibly better survival in some setups.
Both approaches can be excellent — the difference is how well the clinic controls the operative workflow, graft care, and aesthetic planning.
Expert opinion from Hair Clinic Dubai™
Myth: “DHI always gives better survival.” → Fact: Not proven. Survival depends on graft care, speed, and skill and patient factors.
Myth: “If a clinic uses a Choi pen you’re guaranteed naturalness.” → Fact: Tool helps with control — but angle, density and naturalness are planned and executed by the surgeon and team.
Hair Clinic Dubai™ offers transparent and honest information to all hair transplant seekers. If any clinic pushes “DHI is always best” as a sales line, probe deeper: ask for scientific rationale and real clinic outcomes rather than slogans. A poor workflow, an inexperienced team, or bad graft storage can cause failures despite any device.
