Notre équipe de médecins experts spécialisés dans la chirurgie plastique faciale a inspecté de nombreuses cliniques avec le conseil d’administration de HT Consultants, pour garantir à nos patients une greffe de cheveux sûre et réussie. Leurs avis ont un impact majeur sur le choix des cliniques.
Ces rapports sont rédigés en anglais, mais n’hésitez pas de nous contacter en cas de questions grâce au formulaire tout en bas de la page.
Cliniques acceptables - pas de fautes majeures
Cliniques au TOP - nous recommandons ces cliniques
Lors de l’inspection des cliniques à Istanbul, la première chose qui nous a choqué est qu’environ 1 clinique sur 10 (12%) a un standard de qualité égal au standard européen. La moitié d’entre-elles, soit 6% peuvent être considérée comme TOP clinique et recommandables pour nos patients.
Pour être acceptable, une clinique doit remplir les normes d’hygiène, la technique d’anesthésie et le chirurgien doit participer à l’extraction des greffons et à l’ouverture des canaux. Le niveau d’anglais doit être moyen à l’écrit et à l’oral.
Pour être considérée comme une excellente clinique, la clinique doit être orientée patient, prendre le temps nécessaire lors de la consultation et le chirurgie doit avoir d’excellents résultats à long terme. Le niveau d’anglais doit être avancé à l’écrit et à l’oral.

La publication du rapport du contrôle de la clinique sert à démontrer les différences de qualités entre ce que l’on peut trouver à Istanbul et de prouver à quel point nos recherches sont approfondies et à quel point nous sommes déterminés à vous assurer la greffe de cheveux de la plus haute qualité.

Ces rapports ont tous été rédigées par notre chirurgien expert basé à Londres. Ils sont dans leur langue originale c-à-d en anglais.

Le nom des cliniques et de leur personnel ont été censurés pour des raisons de confidentialité.



Staff were on time, courteous, respectful and welcoming to the clients and HT Consultants. Operating area separate to the remainder of the clinic, partitioned by two doors.

Clinic controls


As a HT Consultancy surgeon, I felt like the staff have not been trained in the etiquette of treating an awake patient having a local anaesthetic (as opposed to general anaesthetic where you are unconscious). For example, they would be leaning on the patient head neck and body as if it was a table. They were chatting away in Turkish all the time and rarely asked if the patient was ok. The patient asked for a glass of water after a few hours, but they did not bring him one. Very poor care indeed.

The patient was given a break after a few hours of surgery. After going to the toilet, he sat down to eat lunch when someone came in saying « you’ve got 3 mins to eat then we start again ». He did not feet like a respected patient but more like a prisoner being given orders.



The doctor and his team spoke English to a high standard, and their documents were also in English and easy to understand (including consent form).

Clinic controls


Staff doing graft extraction and insertion don’t speak English. The patient was told an English speaker would be present all times but this is not true. This is a big deal as there were times when the patient wanted them to stop or slow down when injecting the local anaesthetic (due to pain from their poor technique – see below). And other times when the patient wanted a drink of water or go to the toilet. All of these requests were ignored and the nurses continued to inject anaesthetic to the patient in a barbaric fashion. This inhumane standard of practice not be acceptable in Europe.



All staff and patients wear shoe coverings to prevent dirt entering clinical area.

Staff wear surgical gown, mask, sterile gloves.

Antiseptic used to clean donor and recipient area.

Clinic controls


Lack of sterility. The head of the patient was not properly cleaned at the beginning of the procedure. Usually an antiseptic should be used, but they just gave it a quick wipe with an alcohol wipe (which is not enough to clean the area and a poor standard of practice). The nurses would frequently touch non sterile objects and then touch the head of the patient and the grafts again which increased the risk of infection and graft failure. I didn’t see the nurses wash their hands once. They just used sterile gloves. This is an infection waiting to happen. And if your grafted hair gets infected it will not grow and will scar poorly.



Patient centred consultation with an honest conversation of what is realistically achievable in terms of quantity and the quality of the client’s donor hair versus what they wish to achieve. The concerns of the client are clearly addressed. Our surgeons are experienced and reassuring communicators.

Clinic controls


The patient only met the doctor for a few minutes before the operation. After the first greeting words, the first contact was to fill out a consent form which was not understandable at all. The doctor asked the patient to sign 5 minutes after receiving the consent form, which is not acceptable. The patient did not have choice in what he proposed. The doctor did not listen to the patient concerns or wishes. The patient said that the doctor did not stick to the plan agreed on over the phone.



Modern operating equipment is used.

Use of motor hair extraction device.

0.7-0.9mm knife for hair extraction.

Use of magnifying glasses (loupes) to extract donor hair and insert into channels.

Doctors Role:

Consultation with patient before operation, extracts the hair, creates the channels in the direction of hair growth to give a natural result, local anaesthetic injection of recipient area

Role of technical assistants:

Local anaesthetic of donor area – this technique had to be revised to ensure only pain on first injection. After revision of the technique the clients were no longer in pain.

Insertion of hair into channels

Washing hair and bandages (1 day after surgery)

Clinic controls


Problem #1 – False marketing: the doctor did not do any of the procedure – completely done by technicians who do not have a medical degree despite being told beforehand that doctor would be present for the whole procedure and do it in with the assistance of his team.

Problem #2 – Unnecessary painful due to poor technique: Poor technique for infiltration of local anaesthetic made the procedure unnecessarily extremely painful. Instead of inserting needle through already numb (anaesthetised) area they come from opposite direction. In addition, they go very fast and stab the patient as if throwing darts. This goes against all medical teaching, which explains in order to minimise pain, local anaesthetic should be injected through the smallest needle, slowly, and one should use already numb areas to insert the needle. Hence only the first injection hurts and the rest are painless.

Problem #3: No magnifying glasses to help graft placement: The clinic personal did not use magnifying glasses (Loupes) despite being told these would be used beforehand. Also on examining the hair of the patient afterwards, it was clear they had inserted grafts through already existing hair and previously implanted hair, instead they should have gone around these. This will result in damage and possible death of existing healthy hair.

Posez-nous votre question et nous allons y répondre au plus vite!