Print

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

[a]

Hello,

You know there's a method called LATN, after the external fixators removal, your bone gets nailed and you can weight-bear after that.
Consider that you are going to go with LATN method on tibias, instead of LON. What benefits could you possibly achieve?

I mean, the external fixators have an advantage of not occuring knee pain. I think if you go with pure externals and after 3 months, you get "nailing", It's probably going to increase the odds as much as the LON itself as having the knee pain for the rest of your life. (minimal chance)

So, I guess going with the LON instead of having pure externals then nailing would be better. Because you won't need to carry them big ass rings surrounding your shins.

Then I thought about it deeply, I guess if you go with fully externals, you'll have chance of correcting the misalignment i guess, that's why people choose LATN rather than LON, am i right?
Is that the only benefit you could take from LATN instead of LON? Correcting the misalignment? Because as far as I remember you cannot correct the alignment with LON method. You'll need another surgery. I might be wrong, forgive me.

Summary: Are there any more benefits that we could possibly achieve with LATN method except the misalignment correction?

[a]

?

[Hagane]

i dont think there are many advantages, except maybe cheaper?
if i recall many LATN pt's wish they had just done LON due to the  sheer amount of time

[Jokerhastowait2022]

Hey a! Nasılsın kanka?

I believe LATN reduces recovery time and has less risks associated with problems in callus/bone formation. In LON, the nail that is inserted inside the channel of the bone can interfere with the formation of callus/bone and therefore cause Non-unions and etc. However, by doing LATN your inserting the rod after the formation of callus, and therefore less risk of non-union. But some say since the bone is not "hard enough", you'll lose some height that is gained.
I'm not a doctor, though. take all I say with grain of salt.

Best regards,
chasing the dream

[ghkid2019]

Hey a! Nasılsın kanka?

I believe LATN reduces recovery time and has less risks associated with problems in callus/bone formation. In LON, the nail that is inserted inside the channel of the bone can interfere with the formation of callus/bone and therefore cause Non-unions and etc. However, by doing LATN your inserting the rod after the formation of callus, and therefore less risk of non-union. But some say since the bone is not "hard enough", you'll lose some height that is gained.
I'm not a doctor, though. take all I say with grain of salt.

Best regards,
chasing the dream

Lon is way faster

[Ghostfish]

Then I thought about it deeply, I guess if you go with fully externals, you'll have chance of correcting the misalignment i guess, that's why people choose LATN rather than LON, am i right?
Is that the only benefit you could take from LATN instead of LON? Correcting the misalignment? Because as far as I remember you cannot correct the alignment with LON method. You'll need another surgery. I might be wrong, forgive me.

Summary: Are there any more benefits that we could possibly achieve with LATN method except the misalignment correction?

In fact, you can actually correct most of misalignment with LON.  Unless your legs have already severe misalignment or deformity so you can't do LON, I think LON is much better and faster than LATN.

[financialadvisor]

Permanent knee pain is actually hasn't been documented in any studies.

[Medium Drink Of Water]

You know there's a method called LATN, after the external fixators removal, your bone gets nailed and you can weight-bear after that.
Consider that you are going to go with LATN method on tibias, instead of LON. What benefits could you possibly achieve?

Minor correction: in LATN the bone gets nailed before the removal of the fixators, in the same surgery.  So the only difference is whether the nail goes in when the frames are installed or removed.  The difference is extremely minor between the two.

I mean, the external fixators have an advantage of not occuring knee pain. I think if you go with pure externals and after 3 months, you get "nailing", It's probably going to increase the odds as much as the LON itself as having the knee pain for the rest of your life. (minimal chance)

I agree.

So, I guess going with the LON instead of having pure externals then nailing would be better. Because you won't need to carry them big ass rings surrounding your shins.

You would have the rings for the same amount of time.

Then I thought about it deeply, I guess if you go with fully externals, you'll have chance of correcting the misalignment i guess, that's why people choose LATN rather than LON, am i right?

I think many LATN patients choose it because they wanted pure externals but then changed their mind about keeping the frames on for so long.  The three patients I met personally in Serbia all ended up doing LATN, whether it was planned or not.

Is that the only benefit you could take from LATN instead of LON? Correcting the misalignment? Because as far as I remember you cannot correct the alignment with LON method. You'll need another surgery. I might be wrong, forgive me.

Summary: Are there any more benefits that we could possibly achieve with LATN method except the misalignment correction?

Not even that, since you can correct misalignment with LON.  A lot of Beijing patients I met had bowed legs that they were getting corrected simultanenously with getting taller.

Permanent knee pain is actually hasn't been documented in any studies.

I have it.  I'm pretty sure it's tendonitis of the patellar ligament.

[Body Builder]

One less surgery, as you put internal nails together with externals instead of internals a few months after externals.

Still for tibias external only with a hexapod is by far the safest way to do LL and the cheapest one.

[KiloKAHN]

There's also a possibility of damaging the still soft regenerate bone when inserting the nail with LATN. My own surgeon told me that he doesn't know any doctor that prefers LATN over LON, and even Dr Lee has apparently stopped using LATN in favor of LON outside of specific cases that would require LATN.

[anaverageperson]

Less risk of deep infection with LATN because there's no vector to the nail from the outside world like in LON.

[financialadvisor]

So when rods are inserted, they are screwed through patellar ligament? Which causes the rupture of a patellar ligament?

I understand that Patella patellofemoral osteoarthritis is chronic pain, but to come to this you have to go ignore the pain and not do physio or other treatments including surgery or stem cells.

Could you please share more on that?

[Medium Drink Of Water]

So when rods are inserted, they are screwed through patellar ligament? Which causes the rupture of a patellar ligament?

A small incision is made in that ligament, and they put the nail through that hole.  Not screwed in but (somewhat) gently hammered in.

I understand that Patella patellofemoral osteoarthritis is chronic pain, but to come to this you have to go ignore the pain and not do physio or other treatments including surgery or stem cells.

Could you please share more on that?

If you mean me, I don't have patellofemoral osteoarthritis.

[financialadvisor]

I see.

Just to summarize.

You've had LON surgery 12-13 yrs. ago, meaning that an incision was made in that ligament. After nails have been removed, do you feel any discomfort or pain in your knees that could be caused by Patellofemoral syndrome?

I understand that one way to diagnose it besides the pain, would be MRI scan?

Lastly, did you ever took gait analysis or test your feet for pronation? Because from working with my physio I believe that majority of knee, hip problems comes from weak feet.