Print

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

[Uppland]

Been thinking long and hard about doing this thread because I didn't want to make any tibia patients feel bad but I want to know if anyone has noticed the same thing.

While I've only seen two femur patients really (oldiebutgoldie and shyshy) I think their videos look much better than most tibia patients I've seen. They run naturally, seem suprisingly explosive in their movements and they move almost like normal to the point I know I never would have noticed anything was off unless I knew.

So what do you think, is femur patients more likely to regain similar athelisism as before compared to tibia patients?

[Bruno Mars]

This guy did 9 cms in femurs also.

[goodlucktomylegs]

From my reseached ,I have read from paley and lee website ,It said femur is better recover and gain faster mobility late. Because femurstructure as not complex as tibia.What do you think?

[GeTs]

Because tibia patients u have info from have done 3+ inch to the point where their femurs are shorter

[Metanoia]

External femurs are very difficult due to the size of the frames. Therefore cosmetic femur lengthening is mostly done with internal nail. The internal nail surgery is very invasive with reaming of the bone from inside. In case of complications internals are more dangerous than external frames. Also femur lengthening increases the pressure on the knees which can lead to arthritis a few years later. And you'll need another surgery for nail removal.
Hence i would recommend tibia, externally. It's also much cheaper and there are many experienced doctors worldwide. Internals haven't been around for long and long-term effects haven't been researched yet.
Internals have been hyped because there is a lot of money involved. The external frame fits for every patient while with internals much depends on the bone structure of the patient( bone canal width, shape of the bone, etc)
That means you cannot take a successful lengthening example as indication your own lengthening will be the same. If e.g. your bones are more crooked or your bone canal width is smaller than the example patient's then this example is not applicable to you.

[Smallguy]

Did you watch Sweden's running video?

I could also run and do deadlift at the gym but afraid to post a video due to wanting to keep my ID private.

[goodlucktomylegs]

Did you watch Sweden's running video?

I could also run and do deadlift at the gym but afraid to post a video due to wanting to keep my ID private.

You could organise all new accounts for uploading.
Please create and post for sage of all inspirations

[Uppland]

External femurs are very difficult due to the size of the frames. Therefore cosmetic femur lengthening is mostly done with internal nail. The internal nail surgery is very invasive with reaming of the bone from inside. In case of complications internals are more dangerous than external frames. Also femur lengthening increases the pressure on the knees which can lead to arthritis a few years later. And you'll need another surgery for nail removal.
Hence i would recommend tibia, externally. It's also much cheaper and there are many experienced doctors worldwide. Internals haven't been around for long and long-term effects haven't been researched yet.
Internals have been hyped because there is a lot of money involved. The external frame fits for every patient while with internals much depends on the bone structure of the patient( bone canal width, shape of the bone, etc)
That means you cannot take a successful lengthening example as indication your own lengthening will be the same. If e.g. your bones are more crooked or your bone canal width is smaller than the example patient's then this example is not applicable to you.

Are you saying there is moer of an uncertain element to femur lenghtening? I've heard that especially infectious complications are severe in internal patients but also much more rare. Could arithritis be avoided if I did a more conservative amount, let's say 4,5CM?

[programdude]

Not saying its fact, just throwing it out there that when I asked Paley about arthritis he told me that there was zero chance of it when LL is done correctly.

[123]

It's because internal femur patients can leave their nail in their femurs until it's completely consolidated, so they have the nail for 1+ year if not longer. The nail holds a lot of weight, so they don't have to be afraid of bone fracture. External tibia patients remove their exfix before that, the bone is not completely healed, but stable enough for normal walking, just not for squats etc.
But it will heal sometime, it just takes longer for tibia because there isn't much bloodflow at the front of the tibia, because there's only some skin and not muscels like in the back. So it takes a little more time until you get a strong bone bridge there.

Also a lot of people do exfix LL in India or China or another not first world country, so there's ofc some cripples now.

[Metanoia]

Are you saying there is moer of an uncertain element to femur lenghtening? I've heard that especially infectious complications are severe in internal patients but also much more rare. Could arithritis be avoided if I did a more conservative amount, let's say 4,5CM?

The arthritis risk increases with the lengthening amount because the mechanical axis gets shifted. But as mentioned before, no long-term studies exist at the moment.
What you mention about infection is correct. The risk is lower than with externals but in case you get it it's much more severe.
With internals the risk of non-union is higher(especially if the bone cutting is done badly). Further there is the risk of nail and screw breakage. Happens very often and sometimes with very severe injuries.
Another thing are hip problems even long time after lengthening. There even exists the risk of necrosis in the hip joint which would lead to losing the hip joint and getting an artificial one.
Of course doctors will always say these problems can be avoided if it's done correctly. But they'll still insist the patient needs to sign the papers where he acknowledges these risks. That means you are required to blindly trust your doctor.

[Uppland]

The arthritis risk increases with the lengthening amount because the mechanical axis gets shifted. But as mentioned before, no long-term studies exist at the moment.
What you mention about infection is correct. The risk is lower than with externals but in case you get it it's much more severe.
With internals the risk of non-union is higher(especially if the bone cutting is done badly). Further there is the risk of nail and screw breakage. Happens very often and sometimes with very severe injuries.
Another thing are hip problems even long time after lengthening. There even exists the risk of necrosis in the hip joint which would lead to losing the hip joint and getting an artificial one.
Of course doctors will always say these problems can be avoided if it's done correctly. But they'll still insist the patient needs to sign the papers where he acknowledges these risks. That means you are required to blindly trust your doctor.

These things scare me but surely there are risks with tibia operations as well? Is the femur a riskier bone to operate on or is it really more like I have to pick my poison?