The two main options available for quadrilateral are either: LON tibia + Precice femur, or x2 Precice.
Precice x2 can give max 14cm (8 femur + 6 tibia).
LON tibia + Precice femur would still provide effectively a max of 14cm, since going over 6cm on tibia with LON can cause ballerina syndrome.
Notice that LON femur + Precice tibia is not a typical combination for quadrilateral. If this is done, however, I could achieve a theoretical 16cm, since LON can confer up to 2 additional cm over Precice on the femur (i.e., 10 femur + 6 tibia).
I've inquired as to why LON femur + Precice tibia is not typically done. Apparently this is due to stability of LON tibia + discomfort if LON femur is done.
The clinic I've spoken to said LON femur + Precice tibia *can be done* for quadrilateral, it's just not typical.
Unusual Q is:
Would you go with Precice x2, or the unusual combo of LON femur + Precice tibia for quadrilateral.
Cost is not an issue. I also don't care about added discomfort/pain through the process. My main concern against LON is the infection risk. In my mind I say, "Is it worth the added infection risk to potentially gain another 2cm on femur?"
I appreciate it,
Author
Topic: Unusual question about Quadrilateral lengthening (Read 332 times)