ARTAS robotic hair transplant achieves 90 to 95% graft survival rates with transection rates averaging 3 to 7%, based on clinical studies and data reported by high-volume ARTAS clinics. Patient satisfaction at 12 months ranges from 85 to 90%. These numbers position ARTAS as a reliable extraction method, though not significantly better than manual FUE performed by experienced surgeons in terms of final outcomes.
This guide examines the clinical data behind ARTAS, breaks down what the statistics actually mean for patients, and compares robotic outcomes to other hair transplant methods.
Graft Survival Rate
Graft survival is the percentage of transplanted follicular units that successfully establish blood supply and produce new hair growth. It is the single most important metric for any hair transplant technique.
ARTAS Graft Survival Data
| Source | Graft Survival Rate | Study Type |
|---|---|---|
| FDA clearance data | 90-95% | Clinical trial |
| Published clinical studies | 88-96% | Peer-reviewed |
| High-volume clinic reports | 90-95% | Practice data |
| Industry average (all FUE) | 85-95% | Aggregated data |
ARTAS graft survival falls within the same range as skilled manual FUE. The consistency of the robotic system means that the lower end of the range (90%) is higher than the lower end for manual FUE (85%), where surgeon fatigue or inexperience can reduce survival rates.
What Affects Graft Survival
Graft survival depends on multiple factors beyond the extraction method:
- Graft handling time: Follicles outside the body begin degrading after 4 to 6 hours. Faster placement improves survival.
- Storage solution: Advanced preservation solutions (ATP, HypoThermosol) maintain graft viability longer than basic saline.
- Recipient site creation: Proper incision depth, angle, and spacing in the recipient area determine how well grafts integrate.
- Post-operative care: Following washing, medication, and activity restriction protocols during the first 2 weeks directly impacts survival.
- Patient health factors: Smoking, uncontrolled diabetes, and nutritional deficiencies reduce graft survival regardless of extraction method.
Transection Rate
Transection occurs when the extraction punch damages a follicle, rendering it nonviable. Lower transection rates mean more usable grafts per extraction attempt.
ARTAS vs Manual FUE Transection
| Metric | ARTAS | Manual FUE (Experienced) | Manual FUE (Novice) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average transection rate | 3-7% | 5-10% | 10-25% |
| Best reported rates | Under 3% | Under 5% | N/A |
| Consistency over 8-hour session | Stable | Degrades with fatigue | Degrades significantly |
The key advantage of ARTAS is not a dramatically lower transection rate than the best manual FUE surgeons. It is the consistency of that rate across the entire procedure. A skilled manual FUE surgeon may match the robot's 3-5% transection in the first 2 hours but rise to 8-12% in hours 6 through 8 as fatigue sets in.
What Transection Means for Your Results
Every transected follicle is a lost graft. In a 2,000-graft session:
- 3% transection (ARTAS best): 60 grafts lost, 1,940 viable
- 7% transection (ARTAS average): 140 grafts lost, 1,860 viable
- 15% transection (manual FUE high): 300 grafts lost, 1,700 viable
The difference between 3% and 15% transection in a 2,000-graft session is 240 follicular units. At 2-3 hairs per unit, that represents 480 to 720 hairs of difference in your final result. This gap becomes more significant in larger sessions.
Patient Satisfaction Rates
Patient satisfaction is a subjective but important metric. It captures the overall experience, including aesthetic results, recovery, and the gap between expectations and reality.
Satisfaction Data by Time Point
| Time Point | ARTAS Satisfaction | Manual FUE Satisfaction |
|---|---|---|
| 3 months | 50-60% | 50-60% |
| 6 months | 70-80% | 70-80% |
| 12 months | 85-90% | 80-90% |
| 18 months | 88-92% | 82-92% |
Satisfaction is lowest at 3 months because transplanted hair has shed and new growth has not yet appeared. This is identical across all methods. By 12 months, when results are largely mature, satisfaction converges between ARTAS and manual FUE.
Factors That Drive Dissatisfaction
The 10-15% of patients who report dissatisfaction typically cite:
- Density expectations: Expected fuller results than the graft count could deliver
- Ongoing hair loss: Native hair continued thinning around transplanted areas
- Hairline design: Disagreement with the aesthetic result of hairline placement
- Donor area appearance: Visible thinning or dot scarring in the donor zone
- Cost relative to outcome: Feeling the ARTAS premium did not justify the results
Most dissatisfaction stems from mismatched expectations rather than procedural failure. This underscores the importance of realistic counseling during the consultation phase.
For what to expect from ARTAS results at each stage, see our guide on ARTAS results and expectations.
Complication Rates
Hair transplant complications are uncommon but not zero. ARTAS complication rates are comparable to manual FUE.
Reported Complication Rates
| Complication | ARTAS Incidence | Manual FUE Incidence |
|---|---|---|
| Infection | Less than 1% | Less than 1% |
| Significant swelling | 10-20% | 10-20% |
| Temporary numbness | 5-15% | 5-15% |
| Folliculitis | 5-10% | 5-10% |
| Poor growth (under 80%) | 3-8% | 5-12% |
| Donor area overharvesting | 2-5% | 3-8% |
| Keloid or hypertrophic scarring | Less than 1% | Less than 1% |
The slightly lower "poor growth" and "overharvesting" rates for ARTAS reflect the system's AI-guided extraction planning, which distributes extractions more evenly and maintains consistent graft quality. However, these advantages are modest and largely disappear when comparing ARTAS to the best manual FUE surgeons.
Second Procedure Rates
Approximately 15 to 25% of ARTAS patients return for a second procedure. It is important to distinguish between different reasons for repeat procedures.
Planned Second Sessions
Many patients, particularly those at Norwood 4 and above, plan from the start to have two sessions. ARTAS caps at approximately 3,000 grafts per session, so patients needing 4,000 or more grafts will always require multiple sessions. This is not a failure of the first procedure but a planned multi-session approach.
Touch-Up Sessions
Some patients return for 200 to 800 additional grafts to improve density in specific zones. This is common across all hair transplant methods and reflects the challenge of predicting exact density outcomes. Many high-quality clinics include one touch-up session in their pricing.
Revision Due to Poor Results
True revision procedures, where a patient returns because the first session produced unacceptable results, occur in an estimated 5 to 10% of cases industry-wide. This rate is not specific to ARTAS and applies broadly to all FUE methods.
How ARTAS Statistics Compare to Other Methods
| Metric | ARTAS | Manual FUE | DHI | FUT |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Graft survival | 90-95% | 85-95% | 90-95% | 90-95% |
| Transection rate | 3-7% | 5-15% | 3-8% | 1-3% (strip) |
| Patient satisfaction (12mo) | 85-90% | 80-90% | 85-92% | 78-88% |
| Complication rate | 3-8% | 5-12% | 3-8% | 5-15% |
| Max grafts per session | 3,000 | 5,000 | 3,500 | 4,000 |
| Sessions for Norwood 6 | 2 | 1-2 | 2 | 1-2 |
FUT has the lowest transection rate because follicles are dissected from a strip under microscopes rather than punched individually. However, FUT carries the trade-off of a linear scar. DHI shows comparable results to ARTAS because the Choi pen implantation technique is similarly precise.
Understanding the Data Limitations
When evaluating ARTAS statistics, keep these important caveats in mind.
Selection Bias
ARTAS data comes primarily from clinics that have invested in the technology and have a vested interest in reporting favorable outcomes. Independent, head-to-head comparative trials between ARTAS and manual FUE are limited.
Surgeon Variability
Even within the ARTAS system, results vary between operators. A well-calibrated robot in the hands of an experienced team will outperform the same equipment operated by a less experienced clinic. The statistics represent averages, not guarantees.
Publication Bias
Published studies tend to report successful outcomes. Cases with poor results are less likely to be submitted for publication. This inflates reported success rates for all methods, not just ARTAS.
Hair Type Demographics
Most ARTAS clinical data comes from patients with straight, dark hair on lighter skin, which is the system's ideal profile. Success rates for patients with curly, fine, or light-colored hair may be lower than the published averages.
What the Statistics Mean for You
The aggregate data confirms that ARTAS is a reliable, FDA-cleared extraction method that produces good results within its design parameters. The statistics also confirm that it is not dramatically superior to manual FUE when manual FUE is performed by experienced surgeons.
The decision to choose ARTAS should be based on your specific circumstances:
- If you have straight, dark hair and need 1,500 to 2,500 grafts, ARTAS statistics support it as a strong option
- If you need more than 3,000 grafts, the math favors manual FUE for fewer sessions and lower total cost
- If you have curly or light hair, published ARTAS statistics may not apply to your case
For a comprehensive understanding of the ARTAS system, see the ARTAS overview guide.
Get Your Personalized Assessment
Statistics describe averages, but your results depend on your individual anatomy and hair characteristics. Upload a photo at myhairline.ai for an AI-powered assessment of your Norwood stage, estimated graft requirements, and method recommendations tailored to your hair type.
FAQ
What is the success rate of ARTAS hair transplant?
ARTAS achieves 90-95% graft survival rates in clinical studies and real-world practice, comparable to skilled manual FUE. Patient satisfaction rates range from 85-90% at 12 months post-procedure. The system's transection rate averages 3-7%, which is lower than the 5-15% range reported for manual FUE.
How does ARTAS success compare to manual FUE?
ARTAS and manual FUE produce comparable final outcomes when performed by experienced practitioners. ARTAS has a narrower transection range (3-7% vs 5-15%), providing more consistent extraction quality. However, manual FUE allows higher graft counts per session (up to 5,000 vs 3,000) and works on all hair types, which can lead to better outcomes for specific patient profiles.
What percentage of ARTAS patients need a second procedure?
Approximately 15-25% of ARTAS patients pursue a second procedure. This is not necessarily a failure rate. Many patients return for additional density after a successful first session, or they experience continued hair loss in untreated areas. True revision rates due to poor results are estimated at 5-10% across the industry for all FUE methods.