So I've basically settled on a clinic for FUE, roughly 2,400 grafts, hairline and a bit of the front. Happy with the surgeon, did my homework, all good. Then right at the end of the quote there's a line for PRP, "3 sessions recommended", and it adds a fair bit to the total.
The coordinator's pitch was very smooth. Growth factors, better graft survival, faster healing, "most of our patients add it". Which is exactly the kind of sentence that makes me suspicious, because that's what you say about the fries.
Is PRP an actual medical thing that helps, or is it the extended warranty of hair transplants? I genuinely can't tell. Every clinic site says it's amazing, every clinic sells it, so of course they say that.
Had PRP bundled into my DHI 18 months ago. Honest answer: I have absolutely no idea whether it did anything, because I've got nothing to compare it to. My result is good, but I don't know if it's good BECAUSE of the PRP or just because the surgeon was good.
What I'd say is the injections themselves were fine, quick, stung a bit. Not the ordeal the word "injections into your scalp" makes it sound. So it's not that they're selling you something horrible. It's more whether you're paying for something that moves the needle.
Just flagging a thing I see people get wrong: PRP does NOT regrow bald areas. I had a mate convinced he could skip the transplant and just do PRP on a shiny crown. It doesn't work like that, there's nothing there for it to work on. It's for follicles that are still hanging on, not empty scalp.
So if a clinic is selling PRP as some kind of surgery-lite that'll fill in the bald bits, that's the actual red flag, not the add-on itself.
The extended warranty comparison is doing a lot of work here and I think it's fair. My clinic offered it, I asked what the evidence was, and the surgeon (not the coordinator) was refreshingly blunt: "it might help a bit, the studies are mixed, I won't push it." I declined it and spent the money on nothing. Result came in fine.
Point being: ask the actual surgeon, not the sales side. The answer you get tells you a lot about the clinic too.
Let me give you the grounded version, because this one really is muddied by marketing.
PRP (platelet-rich plasma) is a real treatment, not a gimmick, but the evidence that it improves a transplant is limited and mixed. The theory is reasonable: platelets carry growth factors, and concentrating them (a typical prep spins your blood to roughly 3 to 5 times baseline platelet level) and injecting them may support follicles that are still alive. Several small studies show a modest density gain, others show little, and the protocols vary so much between clinics that comparing them is difficult. So "might help a bit" is an honest summary.
Two specific points for your decision. First, on graft survival: in skilled hands survival is already commonly about 85 to 95%, so there isn't much headroom for PRP to improve, and any effect is small and hard to prove. Second, norwood3ben is exactly right: PRP does nothing for a fully bald area, because there are no follicles there to support. If it is being sold to you as a way to avoid or shrink the surgery, that is a misunderstanding of what it does.
A realistic course is around 3 sessions 4 to 6 weeks apart, then maintenance every 4 to 6 months, so factor in that it is a recurring cost, not a one-off. The honest exceptions where it is more defensible: early, diffuse thinning where surgery isn't yet appropriate, or as a modest adjunct if you genuinely want to try everything and the cost doesn't strain the rest of the plan. I've set out the full picture in PRP therapy and hair transplants.
What I would not do is let a PRP line item decide which clinic you use. Judge the clinic on the surgery. And the single best test is the one stevew1978 described: ask the operating surgeon, not the coordinator, what they expect it to change for your case. It belongs on the same list as every other question to ask before a transplant.
Update. Emailed the clinic and asked to speak to the surgeon directly about the PRP rather than the coordinator. His answer was basically the one Dr Haddad gave: mixed evidence, might help a little, no pressure either way.
Declined it for now. Kept the option open to do a session or two later if I feel like it, but I wasn't going to let it inflate the bill on a "most patients add it" line. Booked the FUE for September. Thanks all, this thread genuinely saved me some money and a lot of second-guessing.
