Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[younglengthening]

so I'm around 169cm, maybe 170 morning on a good day
I currently plan to get 6cm femur lengthening. I'll get minimum 5, as I want to be at least 174.
But personally 180+ has always been my dream height. Even something slightly lower, like 178 or 179, since I'd be 180 with most shoes. Which leads me to the question: would it be a good decision to get an additional 3-4 cm tibia?
I'm not 100% insistent on this, it'd just be nice and make me the happiest personally, but I'd still be around average at 175 and can always just wear high shoes or something.

But athleticism is very important to me, swimming, hiking, combat sports, are all hobbies of mine. Explosivity is important to me. Of course, I know I'll never be the same after surgery, let alone two, but I'd like to still maintain 90-95% athleticism and enjoy these hobbies without complication

That being said overall: is it a good idea for me to go with the additional tibia lengthening? Or should I just stick to the 6 cm femur. It could be a good idea to get my first surgery and wait, but if I opt for two surgeries, I could get less femur to compensate: so, say 4-5 femur instead of 5-6, since I'd still be growing ~8cm overall as opposed to 5 or 6

[younglengthening]

My current plan: LL to 175cm, 4cm lifts, and then claim 6'0"
But obviously, the dream for me would not be even wearing lifts at all, or to be able to claim even 6'2"

[GrowGrow123]

Just do 8cm on femur. Hopefully that satisfies you.

If not, you can always go back and get 6cm on tibias.

[DanishViking]

I agree going for 7-8 cm on femurs is the best value for money and properly the smartest idea for most. You can still do anything you could before, but maybe sprint a bit worse but who cares? If my memory is correct I think DR Rozbruch in a interview with Cyborg4life mentioned how 80% of patients where satisfied with only doing 7-8 cm on femurs.

[tallertaller]

so I'm around 169cm, maybe 170 morning on a good day
I currently plan to get 6cm femur lengthening. I'll get minimum 5, as I want to be at least 174.
But personally 180+ has always been my dream height. Even something slightly lower, like 178 or 179, since I'd be 180 with most shoes. Which leads me to the question: would it be a good decision to get an additional 3-4 cm tibia?
I'm not 100% insistent on this, it'd just be nice and make me the happiest personally, but I'd still be around average at 175 and can always just wear high shoes or something.

But athleticism is very important to me, swimming, hiking, combat sports, are all hobbies of mine. Explosivity is important to me. Of course, I know I'll never be the same after surgery, let alone two, but I'd like to still maintain 90-95% athleticism and enjoy these hobbies without complication

That being said overall: is it a good idea for me to go with the additional tibia lengthening? Or should I just stick to the 6 cm femur. It could be a good idea to get my first surgery and wait, but if I opt for two surgeries, I could get less femur to compensate: so, say 4-5 femur instead of 5-6, since I'd still be growing ~8cm overall as opposed to 5 or 6

how ever you choose good luck

[Stretch]

so I'm around 169cm, maybe 170 morning on a good day
I currently plan to get 6cm femur lengthening. I'll get minimum 5, as I want to be at least 174.
But personally 180+ has always been my dream height. Even something slightly lower, like 178 or 179, since I'd be 180 with most shoes. Which leads me to the question: would it be a good decision to get an additional 3-4 cm tibia?
I'm not 100% insistent on this, it'd just be nice and make me the happiest personally, but I'd still be around average at 175 and can always just wear high shoes or something.

But athleticism is very important to me, swimming, hiking, combat sports, are all hobbies of mine. Explosivity is important to me. Of course, I know I'll never be the same after surgery, let alone two, but I'd like to still maintain 90-95% athleticism and enjoy these hobbies without complication

That being said overall: is it a good idea for me to go with the additional tibia lengthening? Or should I just stick to the 6 cm femur. It could be a good idea to get my first surgery and wait, but if I opt for two surgeries, I could get less femur to compensate: so, say 4-5 femur instead of 5-6, since I'd still be growing ~8cm overall as opposed to 5 or 6

IMO; If you have the time and money go for 4cm F + 4cm T or another combination such as 6cm + 4cm. You would be close to your desired height and would keep a similar proprioception. If proportions matter then yeah that too would look more uniform, but we do hear more to often that proportions don't matter to the vast majority of LL patients. (provided you don't overlengthen)

With Femurs only, from my understanding if you reach 8cm there would be things that you can't do as "well" as before or you would need to make adjustments for specific movements. How much of a hindrance well, I don't know! But, I can not recall patients specifically expressing they have to do Tibias solely for functionality reasons, it is mostly always to gain more height.

For you situation I would say the safe approach would be to reach 6.5cm on the Femurs and access from there. (you might be content with 5cm)

Oh and with Tibias be sure to go with a surgeon that is well experienced as I have heard many too unpleasant complications with the Tibias. Not all surgeons are able to perform the surgery with acceptable outcomes.

 

[guy_incognito]

things to consider:
-with your height, going to 180 will make your proportions off, look into SHR
-doing 8 cm on femurs will make your knees split your leg in 1/3 to 2/3 proportions, which is hella weird looking and noticeable when you run
-if you decide to go for more than 5cm, people in life will notice

[our time]

I agree going for 7-8 cm on femurs is the best value for money and properly the smartest idea for most. You can still do anything you could before, but maybe sprint a bit worse but who cares? If my memory is correct I think DR Rozbruch in a interview with Cyborg4life mentioned how 80% of patients where satisfied with only doing 7-8 cm on femurs.

1/5 people weren't satisfied with 7-8cm? Meaning they wanted more?

[our time]

6 femur 4 tibia seems like a good compromise between preserving athleticism and height gain.

[mate10000w]

it’s interesting, which will you do

[JustinSeattle2001]

so I'm around 169cm, maybe 170 morning on a good day
I currently plan to get 6cm femur lengthening. I'll get minimum 5, as I want to be at least 174.
But personally 180+ has always been my dream height. Even something slightly lower, like 178 or 179, since I'd be 180 with most shoes. Which leads me to the question: would it be a good decision to get an additional 3-4 cm tibia?
I'm not 100% insistent on this, it'd just be nice and make me the happiest personally, but I'd still be around average at 175 and can always just wear high shoes or something.

But athleticism is very important to me, swimming, hiking, combat sports, are all hobbies of mine. Explosivity is important to me. Of course, I know I'll never be the same after surgery, let alone two, but I'd like to still maintain 90-95% athleticism and enjoy these hobbies without complication

That being said overall: is it a good idea for me to go with the additional tibia lengthening? Or should I just stick to the 6 cm femur. It could be a good idea to get my first surgery and wait, but if I opt for two surgeries, I could get less femur to compensate: so, say 4-5 femur instead of 5-6, since I'd still be growing ~8cm overall as opposed to 5 or 6

You'll get two camps of people: 1) those who will pursue more modest/conservative gains in order to optimize safety and post-lengthening athleticism and performance; and 2) those who are willing to sacrifice a % of their athleticism and flexibility in order to maximize height gains.

The correct answer is what *you* want, not what anyone here says you should do.

I am personally in the camp of pursuing max height gains, even if it means I won't be the same athletically going forward. This is because I see being tall as better, even if I'm not the same athletically. That's a sacrifice I'm willing to make. Others wouldn't make it.

And just for the record, I'm 172-173 and am going to get Quad Precice 2 to max out at 14cm (8 femur + 6 tibia) in order to achieve ~186. I'm avoiding LON because of the infection risk. Then when I fully heal 1-2 years later, am very much considering another osteotomy / re-breakage to get to ~191 (6'3"). Some would view that as frivolous or absurd. That's fine. Likewise, maybe I won't even care / want that extra 5cm down the road. Maybe I'll be more than content at 186.

As far as proportions are concerned, I don't even care. If you're tall and have proportionally long legs, that's good. I see life as worse being shorter + more proportioned.

The TLDR: the more you're willing to sacrifice, the taller you'll be.

[formosall123]

just book an appointment with some renowned ll doctors. they have *real* medical training and data points

[guy_incognito]

@JustinSeattle2001 arent you scared that your proportions will look off? Im genuinely curious