Limb Lengthening Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: What method of Limb Lengthening is best? Internal Nail vs LON vs External Frames  (Read 3473 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Body Builder

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1949

He expressed concern about embolisms associated with internals.

Paley comments on fat emboli as follows
To date, we have never had a patient die of FES (fat embolism syndrome).
We have however had 2 patients require prolonged ICU treatment prior to discharge
In both these cases the patients had a history of vaping which they failed to disclose.
Paley is not the only doctor in the world that does internal LL.
There are hundreds more. And all of them who had a deceased patient from LL it happened with internal nails and not externals. That is enough to conclude that the risk of fat embolism is way higher in internals compared to externals.
Logged

Maison

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223

Paley is not the only doctor in the world that does internal LL.
There are hundreds more. And all of them who had a deceased patient from LL it happened with internal nails and not externals. That is enough to conclude that the risk of fat embolism is way higher in internals compared to externals.

I agree that nailing can potentially cause fat embolism, and that this risk is not present in external methods that do not use nails.

However, you may be overestimating this risk.
It is clear from this forum that more patients are severely affected by osteomyelitis than suffer severe fat embolism.
The mortality rate from fat embolism associated with limb lengthening surgery is so small that it's difficult to provide accurate statistics.
And even in external methods without nails, there's a risk of osteomyelitis.

Furthermore, for the average person, it's incredibly challenging to live with external fixators for a year.

Still, it's completely fine for you to prefer pure external fixation.
Through our discussion, I hope forum participants will be able to make informed decisions that best suit their individual circumstances.

Finally, could you please answer this question? I believe it would be beneficial for the forum participants as well.

Which doctors in which countries do you think are reliable for the Ilizarov procedure, for example? 
« Last Edit: June 30, 2023, 11:37:36 AM by Maison »
Logged

Body Builder

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1949

I agree that nailing can potentially cause fat embolism, and that this risk is not present in external methods that do not use nails.

However, you may be overestimating this risk.
It is clear from this forum that more patients are severely affected by osteomyelitis than suffer severe fat embolism.
The mortality rate from fat embolism associated with limb lengthening surgery is so small that it's difficult to provide accurate statistics.
And even in external methods without nails, there's a risk of osteomyelitis.

Furthermore, for the average person, it's incredibly challenging to live with external fixators for a year.

Still, it's completely fine for you to prefer pure external fixation.
Through our discussion, I hope forum participants will be able to make informed decisions that best suit their individual circumstances.

Finally, could you please answer this question? I believe it would be beneficial for the forum participants as well.
Catagni is the master of Ilizarovs in EU. But I don't know if he still operates because he must be old now. Pili is his successor and I think he is reliable too.
Also Giotikas is very experiences with ilizaeovs as all trauma surgeons. And of course stay away from Turkey and India at all costs.
Logged

Medium Drink Of Water

  • Moderator
  • Premier Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3587

I've noticed that you generally mistrust medical papers. It's not entirely implausible that both Paley and Rozbruch, who perform cosmetic leg lengthening procedures, may be suppressing or omitting certain inconvenient aspects from their publications for profit.

I'm not even going that far in my assertion.  It's safe to say that there are many unknowns so even experts don't have all the information.

Quote
However, I believe you might be overly concerned about the potential harm to the bone marrow from nail implants.
As GrowGrow123 has mentioned, bone marrow fully regenerates after the rod is removed.

Good to know!  Hearing that is kind of a relief for me.  I'm not sure where I heard otherwise now that I think about it. :-\

Furthermore, for the average person, it's incredibly challenging to live with external fixators for a year.

Quote
Moreover, the gold standard surgical technique for fractures in the diaphysis of the tibia or femur is the intramedullary nail, which often isn't removed after the fracture surgery.

I think this is why it's the gold standard.  It's way more convenient.  And I definuitely do concede and never intended to imply otherwise that on average, the externals do have a greater chance of some complication (regardless of seriousness) occurring, since the average patient won't be as keen on self-care as I was.  And for a doctor to assume the average will apply to any case before treatment begins is the most responsible way of thinking about it from his point of view, since he has no way of knowing in advance what the patient will do.

Quote
Through our discussion, I hope forum participants will be able to make informed decisions that best suit their individual circumstances.

Me too.  I'm transfering this topic to the Information section when the discussion peters out.
Logged

Maison

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223

Catagni is the master of Ilizarovs in EU. But I don't know if he still operates because he must be old now. Pili is his successor and I think he is reliable too.
Also Giotikas is very experiences with ilizaeovs as all trauma surgeons. And of course stay away from Turkey and India at all costs.

Thank you, this post is very informative.
I was under the impression that Dr. Giotikas only performed internal methods and LON, but it seems TSF is also an option.

For the convenience of forum users, I'm leaving the links to Dr. Pili and Dr. Giotikas' websites below.

Dr. Pili
https://drpiliortopedico.it/allungamneto-arti/?lang=en

Dr. Giotikas
https://www.athensbjr.com/cost-pricing-of-cosmetic-limb-lengthening/
Logged

Maison

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223

I'm not even going that far in my assertion.  It's safe to say that there are many unknowns so even experts don't have all the information.

That's a fair point.
Many medical articles on limb lengthening surgery indeed stress that 'the number of cases studied is insufficient and further data verification is desirable.

I think this is why it's the gold standard.  It's way more convenient.  And I definuitely do concede and never intended to imply otherwise that on average, the externals do have a greater chance of some complication (regardless of seriousness) occurring, since the average patient won't be as keen on self-care as I was.  And for a doctor to assume the average will apply to any case before treatment begins is the most responsible way of thinking about it from his point of view, since he has no way of knowing in advance what the patient will do.

I think there is other thing to consider about intramedullary nails besides their convenience.
It's already been over 80 years since the intramedullary nail was invented, but I have never heard of any bone marrow disorders caused by intramedullary nails being a problem.

One of the problems with intramedullary nails is that once osteomyelitis occurs, the bacteria can spread to the entire area around the nail, necessitating removal of the nail and external fixation.
Therefore, even with the internal method,  patients need to choose a decent doctor who will not cause intraoperative infection.

Me too.  I'm transfering this topic to the Information section when the discussion peters out.

Thank you for your kindness.
Logged

NailedLegs

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 164

I'm out of town at the moment, so I will give a more thorough response when I'm back since I'm posting from my phone.

The american doctors you mentioned get much more money and much easier by doing internals with precise than doing externals. Thats the main reason they advertise it that much and say all these bs about its superiority in safety compared to hexapods.
Internals were and will always be a more risky way of doing LL and should be the first option only if someone wants to do LL on femurs. On tibias there is no reason to do internals except you can't take it to have some bulky fixators for about a year which is something I respect and I can understand. But saying that reaming your bone and doing 2 major surgeries is safer compared to just have some screws on your bone which will be removed in about a year (much less if you lengthen 5cm) without even a new surgery is the most stupid thing ever.
And I start to believe that even Paley, who I thought was the most respectable LL doctor, had become a plain merchant who wants to promote precise (which he created and takes money from its rights) and write bs only to gain more money.

I am willing to discuss and give credit to the possibility of Doctors pushing internals(namely PRECICE/Nuvasive Products) due to them being corrupt and financial gain.

COVID exposed how untrustworthy pharmaceutical companies and Doctors are, so why couldn't the same be true elsewhere in medicine? Doctors were getting bonuses/kickbacks if they could convince their patients to get vaccinated, so what if Nuvasive is doing something similar? What if they are purposely suppressing research showing externals as better than internals? Obviously, externals are MUCH cheaper than internals so there's a financial incentive there.

I'm open to that argument, but we will need to dig more into the matter. I haven't seen or heard anything of the like, but it's possible!



Medium Drink of Water touched on something important,  but I wanted to add to it. Internals or externals, the Doctor and his medical team(Physical Therapists, Nurses, Radiologists, and everyone else involved in the process) will be the biggest determining factor in how successful you are with limb lengthening.

I think Medium Drink of Water would agree with this--You are better off getting internals with Doctor Paley or Doctor Assayag than you are getting a Turkish butcher like LLT or WBT. Similarly, you are better off getting externals with Dr. Giotikas or Dr. Parihar than you are with a Turkish butcher like LLT or WBT.

Does anyone disagree with that?

If you give me the option of getting TSF with Dr. Giotikas or PRECICE 2.2 with "Dr." Buldu, I will choose Dr. Giotikas. Who disagrees?

Similarly, you are better off getting internals with Dr. Paley than external only tibias with "Dr." Buldu. Who disagrees?
Logged
"Welcome to the worst nightmare of all... reality!"

Current LL plan:
QLL in Early 2025 using the PRECICE nail with Dr. Birkholtz.
4cm tibia, 4cm femur. One year later, re-break for another 4+4. 167cm -> 175cm -> 183cm

NailedLegs

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 164

Me too.  I'm transfering this topic to the Information section when the discussion peters out.

I think this thread will be a great read for future patients for years to come. I think we've pretty much covered everything as far as pros and cons, and prospective patients could really learn from this thread.

At the end of the day, what method you choose is entirely up to the individual. Nobody here can force anybody to do anything. My hope is that everyone is armed with all the information available, and then they can make an educated decision.

I think this is why it's the gold standard.  It's way more convenient.  And I definuitely do concede and never intended to imply otherwise that on average, the externals do have a greater chance of some complication (regardless of seriousness) occurring, since the average patient won't be as keen on self-care as I was.  And for a doctor to assume the average will apply to any case before treatment begins is the most responsible way of thinking about it from his point of view, since he has no way of knowing in advance what the patient will do.

Another aspect to consider is that few Doctors in the west will do externals for cosmetic patients. Does anyone here know of a Doctor in the USA that will do externals for cosmetic patients? I don't know one. So you're left with butchers in Turkey that lack experience or proper training, who heavily advertise their cheap services and brand on social media, and they wind up getting a lot of uneducated patients who then develop complications. How many cosmetic patients are going to Turkey for externals, versus how many cosmetic patients are going to reputable Doctors such as Dr. Giotikas or Dr. Parihar for externals? If you're going to do externals, at least do them with a Doctor that knows that they're doing.

I think it's fair to say that the terrible reputation externals have are, at least by a decent percentage, due to the "Doctors" in Turkey butchering their patients. I say this disregarding any literature or studies.

As I said before, the Doctor and his medical team are going to play the biggest role in the success of your limb lengthening journey.


I have explained it a thousand of times on this forum.
Much less invasive method, almost zero risks for fat embolism which is the most fatal complication of LL and only one major surgery compared to two for internals (and 3 for latn especially).
Worrying about embolisms is completely valid. Embolisms are probably the worst complication you could get, yet they are also the rarest you can get. I remember Dr. Paley mentioning in an interview that everyone gets fat emboli, it's just that the extent do which they get it isn't enough to worry. It's only a problem when there's enough circulating to begin causing respiratory distress. Which is why things like your O2 levels are continuously monitored.

"Fat embolization occurs frequently following orthopedic trauma. Fat globules have been detected in the blood of 67% of orthopedic trauma patients in one study.[5] This number increased to 95% when the blood is sampled in close proximity to the fracture site.[6]"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3665122/

Will external only patients have some fat globules enter their bloodstream? It's entirely possible.

The reason venting is performed prior to reaming or nail insertion is so that the bone marrow, which is essentially fat and the cause of fat embolisms, has a place to go. If venting isn't performed, then more of that fat will be forced into your bloodstream because it doesn't have anywhere else to go. As mentioned previously in this thread, the bone marrow in your femurs/tibias isn't critical, and once the nail is removed, it will regenerate. It's simply just not something you need to worry about.



What is the risk of embolisms for internals vs externals only? Do we have any studies or Doctors that talk about this? Obviously, it's incredibly rare. But this might be what Medium Drink of Water sorta touched on before, in that it's a case of "we dont know". I'm completely open to whatever info you have on this.

Also the most stable method in terms of weight bearing and the best way to correct any malunions or problems you had even  before LL as this is the main use of hexpods, to correct bones.
It is plain obvious why externals on tibias are for sure the safest LL method. Only merchant doctors say otherwise.
External frames are great for deformity patients. IMN's may not be suitable since they have to actually fit in the bone, and can only move on a single plane. If a patient has a severely deformed leg, may it be from birth or trauma, then a nail may just not work. So I agree with how versitile frames such as Hexapod frames (Good video: https://www.posnacademy.org/media/Hexapod+External+Fixator+Deformity+Correction/1_tf5wdcy0 ) or TSF are, and they can absolutely be used to fix problems you had before LL, we are cosmetic patients. If you are not a cosmetic patient, then what's pertinent to you is quite different.

It is plain obvious why externals on tibias are for sure the safest LL method. Only merchant doctors say otherwise.
I disagree. But I think this thread will be a great resource for prospective patients to make up their own mind and make an educated decision.
Logged
"Welcome to the worst nightmare of all... reality!"

Current LL plan:
QLL in Early 2025 using the PRECICE nail with Dr. Birkholtz.
4cm tibia, 4cm femur. One year later, re-break for another 4+4. 167cm -> 175cm -> 183cm

Maison

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223

"Fat embolization occurs frequently following orthopedic trauma. Fat globules have been detected in the blood of 67% of orthopedic trauma patients in one study.[5] This number increased to 95% when the blood is sampled in close proximity to the fracture site.[6]"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3665122/

Will external only patients have some fat globules enter their bloodstream? It's entirely possible.

The reason venting is performed prior to reaming or nail insertion is so that the bone marrow, which is essentially fat and the cause of fat embolisms, has a place to go. If venting isn't performed, then more of that fat will be forced into your bloodstream because it doesn't have anywhere else to go. As mentioned previously in this thread, the bone marrow in your femurs/tibias isn't critical, and once the nail is removed, it will regenerate. It's simply just not something you need to worry about.


The paper you've shared is very interesting. I also searched for a paper on FES (fat emboli syndrome).
According to this paper, the Reamer Irrigator-Aspirator system significantly reduces the level of FES.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8043637/

The Paley institute states "special reamers that don't raise the intramedullary pressure as much". This could be referring to the Reamer Irrigator-Aspirator system.
https://limblengthening.org/complications/
Logged

TheDream

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 327

Would it be fair to summarize the main risks as:

Purely internal method: Risk of fat embolism due to the bone marrow. Requires reamers to prevent this and is entirely up to the surgeon.

Purely external method: Risk of osteomyelitis due to pinsite infections. Requires a lot of hygiene and maintenance to prevent along with antibiotics if an infection is spotted. Is depended on surgeon, nurses and the patient.
Logged

Maison

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223

Would it be fair to summarize the main risks as:

Purely internal method: Risk of fat embolism due to the bone marrow. Requires reamers to prevent this and is entirely up to the surgeon.

Purely external method: Risk of osteomyelitis due to pinsite infections. Requires a lot of hygiene and maintenance to prevent along with antibiotics if an infection is spotted. Is depended on surgeon, nurses and the patient.

I will make a few corrections to your summary.
In the intramedullary method, reaming is essentially always performed.
During reaming, fat embolization is said to be more likely to occur due to increased intramedullary pressure.
There are several strategies to reduce the risk of fat embolization associated with reaming.
These include techniques such as VENT (pre-drilling holes in the bone) and the use of the Reamer-Irrigator-Aspirator system.
Logged

Kintaeryos

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 144

Damn, I've been researching LL for months now. I had no idea there's debate as to whether external vs internal is more dangerous. I though it was settled and agreed on that external is much riskier than internal. Guess I've got way more reading than I thought left.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up