Limb Lengthening Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: Femur vs Tibia + Procedure Questions  (Read 561 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

trash bandicoot

  • Newbie
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 25
Femur vs Tibia + Procedure Questions
« on: January 08, 2020, 12:10:54 AM »

Hi LL,

I've done some research but am still conflicted which bone I should lengthen. I may be wrong here but I think Femurs are much less invasive and have a greater chance of a full recovery but they take longer (if a time-frame could be provided by anyone I would appreciate) and are more expensive (not sure how much more expensive).

From what I've read of tibias they are much more prone to complications like "ballerina foot" (if somebody could explain ballerina foot I would also appreciate it). But again I'm not sure, and would appreciate some more information from you guys.

For some extra information, I am 5'9 or 176cm, I plan to lengthen 6cm give or take, to reach 5'11 or 6'0. I plan on being 21-22 when I do the surgery so I wont have too much money available I estimate around 30k USD and as such I am factoring countries where the procedure stay and whole process is cheaper preferably Russia over India as I do think Russia is more promising.

A final note: I am no athlete but I am quite active and do value mobility. As such I would like a 90ish% recovery which I think is reasonable as I am only lengthening 6cm give or take, I know that Doctor, Stretching, Lengthening speed, Age and Complications are all factors that contribute so please let me know information on weather this is attainable and reasonable.

Any advice or information is welcome!
Logged

FormerKidd

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 205
Re: Femur vs Tibia + Procedure Questions
« Reply #1 on: January 08, 2020, 03:08:34 AM »

I've done some research but am still conflicted which bone I should lengthen. I may be wrong here but I think Femurs are much less invasive and have a greater chance of a full recovery but they take longer (if a time-frame could be provided by anyone I would appreciate) and are more expensive (not sure how much more expensive).

The femur procedure is generally a little cheaper and the femurs can usually support more growth.  On the other hand, I think recovery from Tibias may be a little easier.

From what I've read of tibias they are much more prone to complications like "ballerina foot" (if somebody could explain ballerina foot I would also appreciate it). But again I'm not sure, and would appreciate some more information from you guys.

From what I understand -- think of a muscle going down the back of the leg to the foot;  if this gets pulled, the foot is permanently in a pointing downward position.  You can't put the foot flat on the ground anymore, so it's like you're permanently on your tippy-toes.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up