Limb Lengthening Forum
Limb Lengthening Surgery => Limb Lengthening Discussions => Topic started by: onlywantafewcmmore on May 11, 2021, 02:53:01 AM
-
What would be the least invasive way of doing this? Or does it not matter how much you wanna add, as it will be equally invasive?
-
I’d say anything up to 5cm on the femurs is very safe and you’ll get back quickly (on stryde nail of course)
-
Go for tibia full externals. It's the cheapest and safest way for you.
-
And are there any reputable surgeon in either Germany or Turkey? As I understand it, this is sort of a new procedure, and probably the most difficult cosmetic surgery there is.
-
Hi there, mate! Cheers!
They are all relly invasive. There are internals and externals, I would say internals go inside your bone, but they give less scaring, infection and other things compared to external. Internals are the most new ones (precisa and the wonderful Stryde). It's a fact that the more you length the more complications can occur, the longer the rehab and revocery will be and a higher chance of not going back to fully 100%. But, it mostly depends at your body, as flexibility, health, and etc. There some people who do 14cm and are completely fine and some who did 5cm and are not the best now.
The best way nowadays is using stryde, but it had a recall due to some issues, but should be released again. Stryde and Precise are almost the same, the difference is that stryde can tolerate much more weight bearing, and that means you have a faster recovery, faster bone consolidations and rehab is easaier.
Doing one segment (tibia or femur) is less invase than doing both segments (tibia and femur) of course.
Won't extend more here, hope it helped, but I can't say which is more invasive, cause they're all REALLY invasive and involves breaking a bone. The lengthening amount does matter a lot, but your determinance, doctor, fexibility, health, PT, rehab, etc matter a lot more!
-
And are there any reputable surgeon in either Germany or Turkey? As I understand it, this is sort of a new procedure, and probably the most difficult cosmetic surgery there is.
I think so, just keep searching here until you find it. Go to the home page and select surgeons stuff there.
It's not new, it's an old procedure, it was mainly used (and mostly used nowadays too) for leg length discrepancy, deformities and for dwarfism. But some years ago they started to do it for short stature. The devices are new, not the surgery itself. The most new devices are precise and stryde.
-
I need to chime in here on this one. If all you want is ONE inch, then you need to just get lifts. It is not worth six figures, months of pain and physical therapy for one inch. I'd say maybe 2, but for 1...no way.
-
I need to chime in here on this one. If all you want is ONE inch, then you need to just get lifts. It is not worth six figures, months of pain and physical therapy for one inch. I'd say maybe 2, but for 1...no way.
I 100% agree. I wear lifts that are much more than an inch and have never been detected. I can walk long distances in them, in fact I prefer how they feel on my feet. 1 inch lifts won’t change how tall you feel... but neither is a single inch of growth.
I’m not judgemental of people who want this surgery, even if they’re already like 5’11”. But I’m slightly judgemental of people who have such small goals. It’s a lot of pain and money for very little effect, and I have a feeling most surgeons would do it gladly because the chance of complications down the road are likely nil. It’s almost free money for them. When I met with Paley, one of his staff hinted that 5cm is extremely easy for virtually everyone to hit, so I’d encourage you to do at least that.
-
It kinda seems good that its easier the less heigh you add? If 3cm is easier than say 6-7cm shouldnt I play it safe and aim for this instead? Especially if 3cm will make me happy.
-
It kinda seems good that its easier the less heigh you add? If 3cm is easier than say 6-7cm shouldnt I play it safe and aim for this instead? Especially if 3cm will make me happy.
It sounds like it would be easier but it's not necessarily easier. You'll have to listen to your body during lengthening to know what it can tolerate. For me, 3cm and 5cm felt the exact same, and I didn't get very tight until 6cm, so I don't think it would have been any easier for me to do 3cm than 5cm. Regardless of how much you want to lengthen, you are breaking your legs and stretching your soft tissue. It will take quite a while to recover regardless.
Also, I couldn't tell a difference in my height at 3cm, so you might be disappointed if you go through all this for just 3cm.
-
Are you saying you did three seperate surgeries for 3cm, 5cm and 6cm?
-
Are you saying you did three seperate surgeries for 3cm, 5cm and 6cm?
🤦🏼
I'm Kidding.
He meant for one surgery, but during each lengthening phase.
-
5 cm femurs
-
I 100% agree. I wear lifts that are much more than an inch and have never been detected. I can walk long distances in them, in fact I prefer how they feel on my feet. 1 inch lifts won’t change how tall you feel... but neither is a single inch of growth.
I’m not judgemental of people who want this surgery, even if they’re already like 5’11”. But I’m slightly judgemental of people who have such small goals. It’s a lot of pain and money for very little effect, and I have a feeling most surgeons would do it gladly because the chance of complications down the road are likely nil. It’s almost free money for them. When I met with Paley, one of his staff hinted that 5cm is extremely easy for virtually everyone to hit, so I’d encourage you to do at least that.
3 cm is a lot when it comes to percentiles though when you are avg to slightly above avg height
-
So the consensus here seems to be that 3cm is not worth it. What would you guys say is the difference between doing 3cm vs 6-7cm? In terms of risk, price, recovery etc
-
So the consensus here seems to be that 3cm is not worth it. What would you guys say is the difference between doing 3cm vs 6-7cm? In terms of risk, price, recovery etc
From what I heard, the pain and tightness is not too bad up until 5-6 cm. But obviously it’s more risky when you increase the length. The price is the same at 3cm than it is at 6-7 cm and recovery is a lot quicker and more likely at 3 cm than 6-7cm If I were you I would get like 5 cm as that’s 2 inches which is quite a noticeable height gain. Plus, if you’re spending a HUGE sum of money you might aswell max out as much as u can safely.
-
so the difference in terms of recovery and all that is most likely not that big when looking at 3cm vs 5-6cm?
-
so the difference in terms of recovery and all that is most likely not that big when looking at 3cm vs 5-6cm?
I think so, but you will have a longer segment, you should also look just a bit if it's going to look weird, cause sometimes you've born with lower knees and they might end even lower after
-
so the difference in terms of recovery and all that is most likely not that big when looking at 3cm vs 5-6cm?
So it’s going to depend massively on the method of lengthening and which bone you choose. 6cm on tibia is a huge amount and with external frames the recovery will be much much longer than 3cm. But if you do say, internal femur 3cm and 5.5 cm is going to carry the same risk roughly. But no matter what length and bone 3cm is just not worth this expensive and grueling surgery I’d say the lowest “worth it” length given all bones and methods would be 4 to 4.5 cm
-
Limb Lengthening techniques are medically designed to give an increase of about 2-3 cm. That is typically the case when someone has a medical condition making one limb shorter. You will probably regain full athleticism and it wont take as long. Letting people increase their height by like 8-10cm is just something doctors do for the extra cash. All medical and surgery research is dedicated to the small increases.
-
TheDream could you please explain a bit more, or if you have any links or similar about how Limb Lengthening techniques are medically designed to give an increase of about 2-3 cm. This is what I was hoping for, but I know this type of surgery is no joke, so I was hoping to have it done as less invasive as possible
-
The big part is breaking the bones and that will leave you unable to walk even if you did 0.01cm height gain. It's not like doing 1cm will "skip" the trauma of breaking your bone versus 8cm. It will take you months to walk normally again even if you did 0.00cm height gain (no gain). You are breaking the bones. This is the fundamental flaw of your understanding. You don't realize how traumatic the initial surgery is. You will be in immense pain and struggle even if you did 0.0001mm lengthening.
-
3cm is absolutely not worth going through surgery pain immobility recovery huge financial costs. Just use a bit higher lifts.
Most people that do it don’t notice the difference until about 5 cm. So yea 2 inches imo is the very minimum what is worth it. And if you just obsess with a number keep in mind it’s just a number. Use lifts and round your height up.
-
I have to agree with the majority of posters here. Going through LL for 3cm is absolutely not worth all the pain, time and money. As someone who is lengthening now, I didn't properly notice a major difference until 4.5/5cm. 3cm simply would be a waste and I don't believe it would make you happy since you wouldn't really be able to notice it, neither would other people. I would suggest going for 5cm and calling it a day as 2 inches is still a solid gain.
And I also have to agree with BTM. 3cm is not necessarily easier as I found the first 3cm to be more difficult than 3-5cm due to the presence of surgical pains. LL is a serious process so think carefully before you commit to doing this for only 3cm.
-
Thank you for the advice guys, I guess I should probably spend more time thinking about this.
What would you guys say is the minimum height one should add if doing this?
-
Thank you for the advice guys, I guess I should probably spend more time thinking about this.
What would you guys say is the minimum height one should add if doing this?
5 cm femurs is really safe. According to Giotikas, it's "easy" on your body up to 6. I'm doing 5.5
-
Thank you for the advice guys, I guess I should probably spend more time thinking about this.
What would you guys say is the minimum height one should add if doing this?
I'd say at least 4.5-5 on femurs to be worth it. 3cm might be worth it on tibias, but it's really hard to actually notice a difference from 3cm in height.
-
From my own research, it doesn't seem that overall length is the biggest factor. It seems that you will always lose some percentage of your previous abilities. There's a good chance you will have lasting effects.
If increasing your height a little is worth the long recovery and not quite ever being your old self then sure.
I also thought of doing only 3cm, but I've basically come to the decision that if I ever did it, I would do at least 5cm, since the physical outcome will not be much different and you get extra height. I'm just deciding whether giving up some of my physical abilities and potentially living with chronic pain is worth being 5'10".
It's a tough one.
-
Ive read several places that up to 5cm is safe, but then other sources say "nope, traumatic either way". Is there any proven reliable source of information? Also whats the difference between doing it via the femurs vs tibias?
-
Tibia you are limited by the achilles tendon. So the max is usually 5-6cm before you really get messed up, ideally stop before 5cm.
Femur you can lengthen more because there is no major impediment like an achilles but you will still be tight no matter what at 6cm and more
it is both traumatic, even if you do 1cm you are breaking the bones
-
it's traumatic either way and the initial step of "starting" the whole ordeal is the same no matter what nail, lengthening amount and doctor. if you do lengthen and want to feel safe you go for as much until it starts becoming problematic (your doctor will tell you), this is individually different. idk why you came to think "ah if i lengthen only an inch this will be easy cheesy" like no it's not. the most difficult part is the first weeks after surgery and not so much going from 3 to 6 or whatever.
a lot of people myself included already said this is not a joke and you shouldn't do this for an unnoticeable change it's absolutely NOT worth it. the minimum of noticeable is 2 inches.
-
The long term loss of athletic ability stems from the lengthening, not the breaking of the bones performed by the surgeon.
Bones heal, that is what they are naturally designed to do. Add to that the fact that the surgeon is making a very clean cut designed to heal perfectly.
It is the muscles, nerves etc. that are not naturally designed to get stretched the way they do during LL. Think about it, you are pulling the muscle apart about one single point (where the bone is being lengthened) under a lot of pressure. The muscle has no way of releasing any of this pressure it is being exposed to. Then add to this the axis of the bone changing during lengthening. The natural femur/tibia rate being changed. In the Tibia you even have a smaller bone, the Fibula, also being lengthened which just adds to the complexity.
By simple deduction it is obvious that every cm you lengthen must have an exponential effect on loss of athletic ability. Some people say that 3-4 cm is unnoticeable and not worth it, but I bet you that going from 173cm to 176/177cm will be noticeable. I think it just depends on your starting height.
Naturally there is still the risk of the surgeon not doing his job perfectly in the procedure, but I am assuming that in reality this wont happen with an experienced and high skilled surgeon.
-
The loss of athletic ability stems from the lengthening, not the breaking of the bones performed by the surgeon.
Bones heal, that is what they are naturally designed to do. Add to that the fact that the surgeon is making a very clean cut designed to heal perfectly.
It is the muscles, nerves etc. that are not naturally designed to get stretched the way they do during LL. Think about it, you are pulling the muscle apart about one single point (where the bone is being lengthened) under a lot of pressure. The muscle has no way of releasing any of this pressure it is being exposed to. Then add to this the axis of the bone changing during lengthening. The natural femur/tibia rate being changed. In the Tibia you even have a smaller bone, the Fibula, also being lengthened which just adds to the complexity.
By simple deduction it is obvious that every cm you lengthen must have an exponential effect on loss of athletic ability. Some people say that 3-4 cm is unnoticeable and not worth it, but I bet you that going from 173cm to 176/177cm will be noticeable. I think it just depends on your starting height.
Long term athletic stuff is debatable. Not everyone is set out to be an athlete, for a lot of people, myself included it is not necessary to do any more sport than occasional hobby ones. If you want to be a top athlete you should consider it twice, yes. I am however definitely down with risking athletic ability for height and psychological improvement.
No it is not, you just perceive people differently when they state their height. In reality young people really do shrink 2cm (or even an inch) during morning to evening so that gives a difference in and of itself. Then it depends on your stature phenotype, if you look lanky slim with long arms you look taller than if you are bulky/stumpy and potentially wearing baggy clothes. If you really measure two people at the same time, both aren't slouching but standing as straight as possible, and one is 5'8 the other one 5'9 and you stand them together you will only notice a tiny bit if at all. Go down an inch from the top of your head it's almost nothing. Hell I even bet hairstyle can make up for that, on photos at least. Then you also always have insoles and lifts.
See thousand things making LL for an inch ridiculous because in the end it is not a difference. You are basically the same height level, you are not pushing yourself into another height league with that. One of my best friends is 1.5 inches taller and everyone, ourselves included, view us as same height. I used to go rock climbing (before corona :(.) with him a lot and everything was the same body length wise (you know, how you grab stuff and place your feet) while other friends that are (starting at about) 3 inches taller or shorter had to do a lot of stuff differently.
-
RealLostSoul, you seem to be very wary of this surgery (for obvious reasons). Are there patients who dont experience complications from this type of surgery; by that I mean who have surgery, recover and then just live their life as if they never had surgery but were just born that way. Or can most patients expect complications in some form or another down the line?
-
RealLostSoul, you seem to be very wary of this surgery (for obvious reasons). Are there patients who dont experience complications from this type of surgery; by that I mean who have surgery, recover and then just live their life as if they never had surgery but were just born that way. Or can most patients expect complications in some form or another down the line?
IMO longterm wise it is possible to 100% recover. For a normal life though. If you want to be a top athlete their is an ever burning discussion, I believe you can make a good recovery but not 100%. What's also never going to be 100% regardless of the amount really is the nerve innervation, however, only subclinically measurable. Meaning you have no symptoms and function completely normal. So that's definitely an easy to answer choice (it doesn't make a difference).
And about complications, most people have some problems down the line like tight muscles, duck ass etc but those are only temporary problems that will resolve. What you should be afraid of complication wise comes post surgery, things that can kill or ruin you. Thrombosis, fat emboli, pulmonary embolism. Bad bone infections. Hidden infections on the nail (will fk you up). Compartment syndrome (even if treated, google fasciotomy and see how big of a fking scar that will leave on your leg). Etc etc.
Most of these problems are bad luck, a bit of the surgeons skill too but most importantly for you, you have that risk when inserting a nail, even a trauma nail without any lengthening. So it's regardless if you do 1cm or 10cm.
The only bad complication that can occur later down the line during distraction is nerve palsy but that doesn't come overnight and you should report nerve problems immediately to the doctor. It is rather rare and I haven't heard of someone having permanent nerve leasions..
e:/ oh and non union of course too but that's what you keep track of with xrays as well.
-
Another thing onlywantafewcmmore, is that by the time you're in your 50s, your going to have probably lost .5" to 1" in height. So consider that.
This is an extremely expensive and debilitating procedure. Minimum amount to be worth doing in my opinion is 5cm or about 2". Anything less is basically pointless.
-
I was hoping for an easier way by only doing a few cm, but seems thats absolutely not the case. One thing that surprises me, Ive had rhinoplasty before, and on the forums there a lot of people are unhappy. I know there will always be a displeased vocal minority, but about 15% of patients require a secondary surgery. On LL forums that doesnt seem to be the case? It seems majority of people come out good?
-
I was hoping for an easier way by only doing a few cm, but seems thats absolutely not the case. One thing that surprises me, Ive had rhinoplasty before, and on the forums there a lot of people are unhappy. I know there will always be a displeased vocal minority, but about 15% of patients require a secondary surgery. On LL forums that doesnt seem to be the case? It seems majority of people come out good?
There are secondary surgeries where you can fix problems that arise (e.g. illotibilial band release of the IT band becomes tight) and leg shortening surgery for overdone cases (which seems to be extremely rare) but usually the “second surgery” would just be to lengthen the other untouched segment if more height is desired.
-
So what are the usual complications that come with this surgey? It seems to me the worst thing (besides the price) is the painful and long recovery