Robotic Hair Transplant: What ARTAS Does, What Studies Show, Cost and Thailand (2026)

A robotic hair transplant is FUE where a machine uses cameras and software to find follicles in the donor area and cut them free. A surgeon still plans the case and designs the hairline, and on most setups people remove and place the grafts by hand.

This page is part of our hair transplant guide. It covers the ARTAS system, a robot with an FDA clearance record and the one clinics name.

The FDA cleared ARTAS four times between 2011 and 2018, which isn't the same as approving its results. The only split-donor trial we found put it against manual FUE in 13 men. It found no significant difference in cut follicles and more discarded grafts on the robot side. In Thailand, one Bangkok clinic says it offers ARTAS and one hospital lists a robot service.

Nobody at AsiaPatient has had a robotic hair transplant or visited these clinics, and we have no commercial tie to any clinic named here. Each claim below says whose it is.

What Is a Robotic Hair Transplant?

FUE, or follicular unit extraction, takes grafts out of the donor area one at a time with a tiny round punch. The ISHRS, the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery, says "Micro-punches vary in their type and include manual, motorized, and robotic."

So robotic FUE is still FUE. The robot is one of three ways to do the harvest. Our FUE hair transplant guide covers the method, and FUE vs FUT compares it with the strip method.

A 2014 review describes the ARTAS harvest: "The ARTAS system analyzes images of the donor area and then a dual-chamber needle and blunt dissecting punch are used to harvest the follicular units." (Rose and Nusbaum, PubMed).

An ARTAS robotic hair transplant is robotic follicular unit extraction done on that system. Restoration Robotics made it, and Venus Concept markets it today.

What the newer versions add

The 2011 FDA clearance covered one job: to "assist physicians in identifying and extracting hair follicular units from the scalp during hair transplantation" (FDA summary, 2011). A 2013 clearance added creating recipient sites (K123548), and the 2018 clearance added implanting harvested follicles (FDA summary, 2018).

Venus Concept says the ARTAS iX can make recipient sites and implant. Its footnote limits that to "ARTAS® iX systems with the implantation feature".

A 2018 company press release on one iX patient says "Nearly 800 (796) grafts were implanted robotically at an average rate of 468 grafts/hour" (Practical Dermatology). That's one case, reported by the company.

What the Robot Does and What the Surgeon Still Does

The split of work depends on the machine and the clinic. Here's what the sources say for each step of robotic hair transplant surgery.

For recipient sites, Bernstein Medical says the physician sets "the number of recipient sites, density of sites, angle that the hair will extrude from the skin, depth of recipient sites". Its ARTAS page also states its stake: "Dr. Bernstein is a medical consultant to Restoration Robotics." The same page says he "has a financial interest in the company." Read its pages for how the workflow runs, not as a neutral verdict.

Miami Hair Institute, a Florida clinic that offers ARTAS, says "The robot also can’t operate independently." A 2020 review says the robot doesn't replace candidate selection, hairline design or the surgeon's judgment of where to place hair (Avram and Watkins, PubMed). Its PubMed record carries the disclosure "Consultant restoration robotics."

Who should do what

The ISHRS says that whatever tool is used, "the key is that the procedure is physician-driven and performed, who has the ethical and legal obligation to perform the harvesting procedure". It also says grafts are placed "most often by the trained staff".

So staff placing grafts isn't a warning sign on its own. What you want is a clear answer on who does each step. See who performs hair transplant surgery and the procedure guide.

Is ARTAS FDA Approved?

It's cleared, which is a different thing. The FDA lists four 510(k) clearances for the ARTAS System from Restoration Robotics, including "Substantially Equivalent" decisions on 4 April 2011 (K103428) and 16 March 2018 (K173358).

A 510(k) clearance means the FDA found the device substantially equivalent to devices already legally on the market. It isn't an approval of results, though several clinic pages still write "FDA-approved". It's also a US decision only.

The 2018 summary sets out who it's for: "The ARTAS System from Restoration Robotics is indicated for harvesting hair follicles from the scalp in men diagnosed with androgenic alopecia (male pattern hair loss) who have black or brown straight hair." Venus Concept says ARTAS iX is cleared for the same group.

Who it suits: hair color, curls and shaving

That indication matters most if your hair is grey, white, blond or curly. The clinics that offer the robot don't fully agree.

• Bernstein Medical says the robot "can be used in patients with any hair color although in order for the robot to visualize white hair (or very light blond hair) the hair must be dyed." It adds that "the donor hair in a robotic procedure is shaved to approximately 1 mm in length".
• Miami Hair Institute says robotic systems "traditionally work best with dark, straight hair and can struggle with light-colored, curly, or very fine hair". It adds that manual FUE "might be more appropriate" around scars or in tight areas.
• The Acibadem International blog, from a hospital group that sells hair transplants, says "tightly curled or very light hair may require dyeing or rule out the robot entirely."
• A 2014 review says "Optimal candidates for robotic FUE are those with dark hair color who can sit for 45 to 120 minutes and are willing to shave a large area for donor harvesting." (Avram and Watkins, PubMed).

If you don't want a fully shaved donor area, or your hair is light or tightly curled, ask early whether the robot fits you at all. See am I a candidate and the donor area guide.

Robotic vs Manual FUE: What the Studies Show

The question most people have is whether the robot damages fewer follicles than a skilled hand. Transection means a follicle cut through during harvest.

The one split-donor trial (13 men, 2024)

A team at Huashan Hospital in Shanghai split each patient's donor area in two. "The donor site of each patient was randomly divided into left and right regions, receiving ARTAS on one side and FUE on the other." The patients were 13 Chinese men aged 25 to 35 with Norwood II to IV hair loss (Zhu 2024, PubMed).

Of the three overall rates, the only significant difference was the higher discard rate on the robot side. By graft type, the paper reports significantly lower transection on the robot side for one-hair and three-hair grafts. For the higher overall discard rate, the authors point to the robot taking more one-hair grafts, "nearly 30% compared to FUE's 7%".

Over 12 months of follow-up, it found "no significant difference in hair regrowth and patient satisfaction between ARTAS and FUE", and no complications. The authors conclude the current robot "is effective and safe, and can be recommended for AGA hair transplantation surgery."

Read the design before leaning on it. The full text says "ARTAS was always performed first and FUE second." The surgeons had "over 10 years of experience", and transection was counted per hair, not per graft. The authors declare no conflicts of interest and list Shanghai government funding.

They also write "We acknowledge the limitation of a small sample size and its potential impact on the study's findings." The paper doesn't name which ARTAS model was used; it gives only the software version, 4.8.2.

Robot-only studies, with no manual group

Don't line these numbers up against each other or against the 2024 trial. Studies count transection differently.

The Korean authors list "lack of comparative study with conventional FU extraction modalities" as a limitation. The Bernstein and Wolfeld study compares two robot settings, and Dr. Bernstein has the financial interest noted above.

What reviewers say

• A 2014 review says the robot "will require further independently funded, peer-reviewed, clinical testing to establish its efficacy relative to existing hair restoration methods in clinical practice." (Gupta 2014, PubMed).
• A 2020 review by the same lead author says new FUE methods, punch shapes and motorized devices have also brought transection down (Gupta 2020, PubMed).
• A 2017 review lists "manual versus robotic" harvesting among the open controversies in hair surgery (Avram 2017, PubMed).
• A 2026 review of robots across plastic surgery names "high costs, technical complexity, and the absence of haptic feedback" (no sense of touch) as the main limits (Cai 2026, PubMed).

The Acibadem blog puts it as "Published series show robotic transection rates comparable to skilled manual FUE, not better". That fits the trial above. We found no study showing robotic FUE is better or worse than manual FUE on final results.

What the growth studies cover, and what they don't

• The 13-man trial followed patients for 12 months and found no significant difference in regrowth or satisfaction.
• The maker's 2011 FDA submission reported the robot substantially equivalent to manual harvest at nine months, in 36 subjects.
• The maker's 2018 FDA submission found follicle survival with robotic implanting non-inferior to manual implanting at 9 months, in 30 subjects.
• Each of these had 13 to 36 people.
• No peer-reviewed study we found tests the iX against manual FUE; the maker's 2018 FDA submission compared robotic and manual implanting only.
• No peer-reviewed cost comparison turned up.

That might change as newer machines get studied. For results in general, see the success rate guide and hair transplant risks.

How Common Is Robotic FUE?

Not very: robotic-assisted FUE was 1.3% of the FUE procedures that responding members reported. The ISHRS 2025 Practice Census reports "‘motorized FUE technique without suction (hand-held)’ (75.1%), followed by ‘motorized FUE technique with suction (hand-held)’ (19.8%), ‘manual FUE technique’ (3.8%), and ‘robotic assisted FUE technique’ (1.3%)."

The census had 247 responses from 946 members with valid emails, a 26% response rate, and the method chart gives n = 172. So it describes the members who answered, not every clinic, and it doesn't count who owns a robot.

A 2025 review reads differently: "the adoption of robotic technology for both graft extraction and incision is becoming increasingly common in FUE procedure" (Chauhan 2025, PubMed). The two don't measure the same thing, and we show both.

Not every clinic has one. Miami Hair Institute says "Not all clinics offer robotic hair transplant services because of the significant investment required to acquire and maintain the technology." More figures are in our hair transplant statistics.

Robotic vs Manual FUE Cost

Most sources say robotic FUE costs more, but they disagree on how much, and one clinic's own pages disagree with each other.

All of these are US dollars, and none of the US ranges states a graft count. Bernstein's two statements disagree on the per-graft price, and we don't pick one.

Patients disagree too. A 2019 HairLossTalk post said "Artas is twice the price." In a December 2020 r/HairTransplants thread about a US ARTAS quote (the opening post is now deleted), one reply said ARTAS is usually cheaper than manual, with manual at about $6 a graft.

Robotic hair transplant prices in Thailand

Only one Thai robot price turned up. Million Hair Transplant Center in Bangkok says on its English robot page "ARTAS ROBOTIC PRICE IS THB120/GRAFT." The page shows no date, but its own page data says it was published in August 2019.

The same clinic has a separate Thai page offering FUT and FUE from THB 35 per graft (our translation), a starting price. Its price page says the per-graft price depends on technique, equipment and the solution used to store grafts (our translation).

For manual FUE, patients report paying THB 36 to 123 per graft across five Bangkok clinics (31 reports and quotes, 2023 to 2026). None of those is a robot price.

These figures aren't like-for-like, so we don't work out a robot surcharge from them. Ask for the current robotic and manual price per graft in writing. See is a hair transplant worth it and how many grafts you need to size the total.

Is There a Robotic Hair Transplant in Thailand?

One Bangkok clinic says yes, and one Bangkok hospital lists a robot service. As of 13 October 2026 we found no robot service on the sites of eight other Thai clinics.

What Thai clinics and hospitals say

Million Hair Transplant Center (MHC), Bangkok. Its Thai home page says, in our translation, that it is the first and only hair transplant clinic in Thailand to transplant with the "Artas 9X" technique, with a specialist physician controlling the robot. No maker page we read names a product called 9X.

We can't test "first and only", so treat it as the clinic's claim. Its robot pages, in our translation, say the doctor and robot staff control the robot and trained nurses collect the follicles, the same split the US clinics describe.

The English page also claims a "low damage rate (2.5-8.7%) when compared with FUE process using other equipment" and names no study for it.

The clinic's doctor page lists its surgeon, Dr. Thitiwat Wirarojratchakul, as a "Diplomate of the American Board of Hair Restoration Surgery (ABHRS)" and an ISHRS member. The ABHRS directory lists a Diplomate with "Certification Year 2023". The ISHRS directory lists "ISHRS Full Member" with the "ABHRS Diplomate" award.

Samitivej Hospital, Bangkok. Its hair restoration medical center page, run with Bioscor International, lists "Robot hair transplant" among its services. It names no robot model, price or surgeon, and a service list line doesn't show a robot is in use today.

A medical travel booking site, BookingHealth, lists a Samitivej program "with ARTAS robot". That's the booking site's listing, not the hospital's.

A Thai prototype. Engineers at Mahidol University built their own hair transplant robot and have tested it on a silicone model of a scalp, not on people (Thuangtong 2025, PubMed). It's a lab project, not a clinic service.

Where we looked and found no robot service

We read every page in each clinic's sitemap and searched the text for robot, ARTAS, NeoGraft and the Thai words for robot. That finds a service only if the site writes one of those words, not in images, social posts or chat.

None of those pages offers a robot service at that clinic. For Yanhee, Kamol, Asia Cosmetic, Medpark, Bangkok Hospital, Phyathai, Vejthani and PHD Clinic, we only searched page addresses; the hits were robotic knee or spine surgery. Bumrungrad's hair page has no robot mention.

We didn't search Thai regulator records, Facebook, LINE, Instagram or Thai forums, so this page says nothing about clinics outside the list. One booking site also lists a Phuket clinic with ARTAS, but we couldn't find that clinic's own website, so we don't name it.

Two of the Bangkok clinics argue against the robot, and both sell manual FUE. HairTran's robot article tells readers, in our translation, to ask any doctor for their "Transection Rate (Tx rate)", and says the robot costs many millions of baht and pushes fees up for no need.

Hairsmith's robot article says, in our translation, that the robot isn't 100% automatic and can't design the front hairline. Its English page claims "the transection rate is less than 3% which compares favourably with ARTAS robots." That's the clinic's own figure, with no data shown.

What Patients Report

The patient comments we found are almost all on r/HairTransplants, plus one older HairLossTalk thread. That community leans strongly against ARTAS, so read these as what these commenters say, not what most patients think. None is verified, and we found no patient report from Thailand.

The negative reports

In a November 2024 thread, ARTAS Hair transplant surgery, u/shawtywannaparty wrote "I got one, don't do it. Brutal to the donor area…" and later "they used it just for extraction, i survived but the donor post op was a blood bath n took 3 weeks to heal".

In July 2025, u/Altruistic-Note1672 wrote in the same thread "The donor area is a total mess. The transplanted area lost all hair." The comment doesn't say whether this happened to them.

Others treat the robot as a sales pitch. In a March 2026 thread asking whether ARTAS is worth it or just marketing, u/ozi1978 replied "Definitely marketing". In a February 2025 thread, a commenter wrote "there is no reason you should be paying a 2x premium."

Several commenters say the robot uses a bigger punch. In a 2022 thread, u/FUE3300 wrote "ARTAS used larger punch size than manual extraction." That's a patient claim. Bernstein Medical says it picks punch sizes for each patient, Ziering's table lists 0.8 to 1.2 mm for both methods, and we found no study comparing the two.

One commenter in that 2022 thread claimed a high share of damaged grafts from what they'd seen. The measured figures are the ones above: 13.17% per hair in the 13-man trial, and a 6.6% average in the 2014 review.

The positive reports

In the November 2024 thread, u/seocoin wrote "I personally had 2,300 graphs harvested by the Artas IXi. The surgeon is absolutely involved." They added "the way it identified the healthy and plentiful areas of my donor area I have zero regrets".

In June 2023, u/MajesticAccountant27 wrote "I did ARTAZ in November of 2022" and described "the donor area which healed original really well".

The advice that keeps coming up

Several replies give the same advice: judge the surgeon, not the machine. In November 2024, u/Lopsided_Pair5727 wrote "don't be dazzled too much by any technology marketed to reign your dollars in".

In April 2026, someone weighing ARTAS iX abroad asked whether the robotic part improves yields or is just a marketing gimmick (r/HairTransplants). u/kogofingo1 replied "Focus on finding a doctor who is actually involved in the procedure, not relying on robotic systems, and consistently producing solid results."

A 2026 asker in another thread noted "A lot of research is about older machines, older software." For donor scars, see hair transplant scars.

Questions to Ask a Clinic That Offers a Robot

Tick these off as you get answers.

• Which model is it, and does the robot harvest only, or also make sites or place grafts?
• Who removes the grafts from the scalp, and who places them?
• Does the surgeon design the hairline and set the recipient sites?
• Does my hair color and type fit the FDA indication of black or brown straight hair?
• How much of my head will be shaved?
• What is the surgeon's own transection rate? (HairTran suggests asking this.)
• What is the current price per graft for robotic and for manual FUE, in writing?

Our full list of hair transplant consultation questions covers the rest.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a robotic hair transplant better than manual FUE?

No source we found shows it's better or worse on final results. The only split-donor trial, with 13 men, found no significant difference in transection, a higher discard rate on the robot side and a lower but not significant yield. A 2014 review asked for independently funded testing.

Does the robot do the whole hair transplant?

No. On most setups the robot finds and cuts the grafts, a technician removes them, and the surgeon plans the case and designs the hairline. Some clinics also use it to make recipient sites, and the maker says iX systems with the implantation feature can place grafts. Ask which steps your clinic's machine does.

Is ARTAS FDA approved?

It's FDA cleared, not approved. The FDA has cleared it four times as substantially equivalent to devices already on the market, including on 4 April 2011 and 16 March 2018. The cleared use covers men with male pattern hair loss who have black or brown straight hair.

Does a robotic hair transplant work on grey, blond or curly hair?

It might not. The FDA indication names black or brown straight hair. Bernstein Medical says white or very light blond hair must be dyed for the robot to see it. Miami Hair Institute says robotic systems can struggle with light, curly or very fine hair.

Does a robotic hair transplant cost more than manual FUE?

Most sources we found say so, but they disagree. One New York clinic wrote in 2015 that robotic may cost slightly more per graft, and its current page says the same per graft with a higher minimum fee. The one Thai figure is THB 120 per graft, on a Bangkok clinic page first published in 2019.

Can I get a robotic hair transplant in Thailand?

Possibly. Million Hair Transplant Center in Bangkok says it offers ARTAS and calls itself the first and only clinic in Thailand to do so. Samitivej Hospital lists a robot hair transplant without naming a system. Eight other Thai clinic sites we searched show no robot service.

Does the robot use a bigger punch or damage the donor area?

Some patients on Reddit say so, and others report a donor area that healed well. Clinics say punch size can be chosen, and we found no study comparing punch size between robotic and manual FUE.

What should I ask a clinic that uses a robot?

Ask which model it is and which steps it does, who removes and places the grafts, and whether the surgeon designs the hairline. Check your hair against the FDA indication and get the current robotic and manual price per graft in writing. The consultation questions page has more.

Sources and Dates

The FDA, journal, clinic, hospital, forum and Reddit pages quoted here were read 13 October 2026 (GMT+7). Reddit dates are the comment dates in each thread's feed. Several clinic pages carry no date, and the Million Hair Transplant Center pages with the THB 120 and THB 35 prices were first published in August 2019. Clinic prices and services change, so treat the written quote you get as the current version.

Next Step

If you're weighing robotic or manual FUE for your hair loss in Thailand, tell us what you're planning and get a free quote from clinics that fit your case. Ask each one which steps its machine does and what it charges per graft, in writing.