Limb Lengthening Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

Author Topic: Limb Lengthening Methods  (Read 71194 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

KiloKAHN

  • Moderator
  • Premier Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2105
  • Digital Devil
Limb Lengthening Methods
« on: October 14, 2013, 10:31:39 PM »

There are a variety of approaches that one can choose from to lengthen his limbs. Below is a list of known methods along with their advantages and disadvantages.

What is limb lengthening?

Limb lengthening is the gradual elongation of bone and soft tissues (skin, muscle, nerves, blood vessels). Using an external device called an external fixator or one of various internal devices, the bone and soft tissues are slowly pulled apart and gradually lengthened in a process called distraction. The distraction is done at a recommended average of 1 millimeter per day. If the rate of distraction is higher than this, complications such as muscle contracture (tightness), nerve paralysis, and bone non-union can occur. If distraction is done too slowly, premature consolidation (gap between the bones is filled with regenerate bone) is possible, preventing further distraction. The distraction rate of 1 mm per day is not a strict rule, as there are frequently cases that require a slower distraction rate, and occasionally a faster rate. Once the desired length is obtained, distraction stops and the consolidation phase begins. The consolidation phase is the period when newly formed bone calcifies. Once the bone is fully healed, the lengthening device can be removed.

External Methods of Limb Lengthening

Ilizarov Apparatus

The Ilizarov Apparatus was invented in the Soviet Union by Dr. Gavriil Abramovich Ilizarov in 1951 and has been used in North America since 1981 for correction of leg deformities and lengthening. The Ilizarov Apparatus (also known as the Ilizarov fixator or ring fixator) is an assembly of 2 or 3 rings that encircle the leg or arm and are applied to the bone using screws and wires, each ring connected to the other by connecting rods. The Ilizarov Apparatus is applied through surgery, where the wires are threaded through the skin and muscle that lie over the bone which will be corrected or lengthened. The rings are then secured with telescoping rods and a small cut is made in the limb between the rings.  Through the cut’s opening, the outer layer of bone is sliced, leaving the inner marrow undamaged. The lengthening phase is started about one week after the initial surgery, where the patient turns screws on the Ilizarov Apparatus that turn to stretch the bones slowly. Once distraction is done, the fixator remains in place for the consolidation phase so as to prevent the regenerate bone from breaking under the weight bearing load. A child will have to wear the external fixator for approximately 1 month for each centimeter lengthened. Adults may require 1.5 to 2 months or longer per centimeter.


Advantages: Cheapest lengthening option. No additional surgery required after frame removal

Disadvantages: Prolonged time wearing Ilizarov Apparatus has a higher chance of health-related complications such as pin tract infection and decreased range of motion in joints. This can also have a negative psychological effect to the patient, leading to frustration and lack of willingness to participate in physiotherapy. Risk of fracture in regenerated bone after frame removal due to the lack of internal stabilization. May require repeated adjustments to avoid bone misalignment. Discomfort and soft tissue tethering due to pin sites.

LON (Lengthening Over Nail)

Lengthening Over Nails combines a ring fixator for lengthening and a regular intramedullary nail. The LON concept was first introduced by F.C. Bost and L.J. Larsen in 1956 but was popularized by Dr. Dror Paley in 1990 in order to reduce the treatment time in EF (external fixation). During the operation, a hole is made through the bone in order to provide space for an intramedullary nail (nail inside the central cavity of a bone shaft where bone marrow is stored). The hole is made to be approximately 1.5 mm larger than that of the nail itself. This process is called reaming. Once the bone is reamed, the intramedullary nail is inserted into the bone’s central cavity and then locked at the proximal end (the end closer to body’s center) of the nail using screws. A corticotomy (cutting of the bone) is then performed, followed by attachment of the external fixator. The lengthening phase is started about one week after the initial surgery, where the patient turns screws on the Ilizarov Apparatus that turn to stretch the bones over the intramedullary nail slowly. Once the desired length is achieved, two distal (the end farther from body’s center) interlocking screws are inserted into the nail and the external fixator is removed. The purpose of the intramedullary nail is to provide weight bearing support during the consolidation phase. Once the bones are fully consolidated, another operation is needed to remove the nails along with a week’s bed rest for the bones to heal from nail removal.


Advantages: Requires only 1/3 of the time wearing an external fixator as compared to the purely external method. Intramedullary nail helps prevent misalignment in regenerate bone. Fewer complications than external method overall.

Disadvantages:  Higher rate of pin site infection due to presence of intramedullary nail during lengthening. Requires acute deformity correction which compromises bone healing potential during subsequent lengthening. Comparatively high incidence of deep intramedullary infection. Additional surgery required to remove intramedullary nails years later. Need to be careful of impact on intramedullary nails during consolidation due to risk of re-fracture. Doesn’t appear to reduce the duration needed for bones to heal compared to purely external method. Unlike LATN, LON uses a small diameter nail so bone can regenerate over it, allowing less stability than LATN method. Discomfort and soft tissue tethering due to pin sites.

LATN (Lengthening and then Nailing)

LATN is a newer limb lengthening technique that combines external and internal methods.  The Ilizarov Apparatus is applied through surgery, where the wires are threaded through the skin and muscle that lie over the bone which will be corrected or lengthened. The external fixator is prepared so that an intramedullary nail can be placed inside the bone later. The rings are then secured with telescoping rods and a small cut is made in the limb between the rings.  Through the cut’s opening, the outer layer of bone is sliced, leaving the inner marrow undamaged. The lengthening phase is started about one week after the initial surgery, where the patient turns screws on the Ilizarov Apparatus that turn to stretch the bones slowly. Once distraction is done, a reamed intramedullary nail is inserted into the bone’s central cavity to support the bone during the consolidation phase, allowing early removal of the external fixator. Once the bones are fully consolidated, another operation is needed to remove the nails along with a week’s bed rest for the bones to heal from nail removal.

Advantages: Requires only 1/3 of the time wearing an external fixator as compared to the purely external method. Quicker bone healing rate than pure external method. Lower rate of infection than LON. Infections can be treated more easily and gradually during lengthening due to absence of intramedullary nail present in LON method during lengthening phase. Larger diameter nail than the one used in LON method is inserted into bone cavity during consolidation, allowing greater stability and increased protection against re-fracture.

Disadvantages:  May require repeated adjustments to avoid bone misalignment due to lack of IM nail during lengthening phase. Need to be careful of impact on intramedullary nails during consolidation due to risk of re-fracture. Discomfort and soft tissue tethering due to pin sites.

Unilateral External Fixator (Monorail Fixator)

Monorail Fixators are similar to the standard Ilizarov Apparatus. However, instead of a bulky external frame there is a single bar that runs along the outside of the limb and is attached with between 4 and 6 pins to the bone. It provides more comfort than the Ilizarov fixator and is often used when treating arm deformities. Unilateral lengtheners can be purely external or can be combined with an intramedullary nail as used in the LON method.


Advantages: Fewer scars than standard Ilizarov Apparatus due to less pins, can be worn under clothes, suitable for pediatric patients with smaller limbs.

Disadvantages: Pinhole scars are larger than scars made by the Ilizarov Apparatus due to greater pin size. Pin site infections are common. Less stability than standard Ilizarov Apparatus. Some patients say the larger pinhole sites cause more pain than the standard Ilizarov Apparatus.

Salamehfix (SLDF)

The Salamehfix (SLDF) System is a hinged, Eternal Fixation System developed by Prof. Ghassan Salameh in Syria. It is an arc system rather than a circular system and consists of three small arcs. The arcs are not the same diameter so the system can take the shape of leg.


Advantages: Screws and wires are in minimally painful regions, making it more tolerable than the traditional Ilizarov Apparatus. Provides for stable fixation and early full weight bearing. Device developed to maintain proper alignment during lengthening. Clothes can be worn over it during the lengthening and consolidation phases due to its small size.

Disadvantages: Prolonged time wearing Salamehfix (same as external fixator) can have a negative psychological effect on the patient, leading to frustration and lack of willingness to participate in physiotherapy. Risk of fracture in regenerated bone after frame removal due to the lack of internal stabilization.

Micro-Wound

Developed in Chongqing, China by Dr. Helong Bai, the Micro-Wound is a thin external fixator clip that is attached to one side of the leg and doesn’t have the uncomfortable bulkiness of the classic Ilizarov Apparatus.


Advantages: More comfortable than the Ilizarov Apparatus. Fewer pinhole sites and scars.

Disadvantages: Only one surgeon seems to use this method. Risk of fracture in regenerated bone after frame removal due to the lack of internal stabilization. Not as stable as standard Ilizarov Apparatus. Minimal peer-reviewed research on this method. Very mixed results from former patients. More costly than other options in China that already have a good track record.

Internal Methods of Limb Lengthening

The advancement of limb lengthening technology has led to internal options for lengthening that avoid the use of uncomfortable external fixators.

Albizzia Nail and its updated nails - Guichet Nail and Betzbone

The Albizzia nail was invented by Dr. Jean-Marc Guichet with assistance from his professor, Paul Marie Grammont. It is a fully implantable nail that is locked into the bone with screws. The nail distracts when the patient rotates the foot or ankle until it makes a clicking noise, alerting the patient that distraction has taken place. The patient can determine the rate of distraction by performing a set number of “clicks” per day. The Albizzia nail has an automatic 'dynamization' system in its mechanism. During weight-bearing and walking, as the nail supports more weight, more bone formation is stimulated. When the bone strengthens, the loading force is gradually transferred to the bone and the load on the nail decreases. With the bone becoming stronger, it eliminates the need to remove screws to remove axial load from the nail to the bone.

The original Albizzia nail is no longer in production, however Dr. Guichet and Dr. Betz have developed the Guichet Nail and Betz Bone respectively. Both are reportedly more sturdy and reliable than the original Albizzia.


Advantages: Reduced risk of joint stiffness, infection, and pain than external methods. Greater comfort and tolerance compared to externals.  Fewer scars. No soft tissue tethering as with external methods. Weight bearing permitted during distraction phase. Only two operations needed.

Disadvantages: Costly. Requires considerable movement at the hip to initiate lengthening, making it more uncomfortable than other internal methods. Need to be careful of impact on internal nails during consolidation for risk of refracture.

Bliskunov Nail

The Bliskunov Nail was invented by the late Professor Alexander Bliskunov. The Bliskunov Nail is similar to the Albizzia Nail and its successors, but with some notable differences. In addition to the internal nail set inside the bone cavity, the Bliskunov Nail includes a part in the pelvis that connects the femur to the pelvis. The patient uses lateral movements of the whole limb to distract the nail.


Advantages: Reduced risk of joint stiffness, infection, and pain. Greater comfort and tolerance compared to externals. Fewer scars than externals. No soft tissue tethering as with external methods.

Disadvantages: More costly than external methods. Longer scars than other internal methods, including a scar on the pelvis. Dynamization (removal of upper or lower femoral screws to allow loading through newly formed bone rather than through nail) can cause between a 2 to 7 mm loss in height gain.

Intramedullary Skeletal Kinetic Distractor (ISKD)

The ISKD was invented by Dr. J Dean Cole, orthopedic surgeon and President of Orthodyne Inc. The ISKD uses a kinetic clutch mechanism to lengthen the limb. One end of a rod is screwed onto another and the rod is inserted into the bone cavity. Small rotational movements by the patient cause the telescopic nail to lengthen. The clutch ensures that the rod can rotate only in one direction and a monitor is included to track how much the leg has distracted at any point in time.


Advantages: Reduced risk of joint stiffness, infection, and pain. Greater comfort and tolerance compared to externals.  Fewer scars. No soft tissue tethering as with external methods.

Disadvantages: High rate of mechanical failure requiring additional surgery to replace. Device is not full weight bearing which leads to weakening of muscles. Distraction rate difficult to control due to small degree of rotation required for lengthening, allowing one to possibly lengthen even 5 mm in a single day. Difficulty in controlling lengthening rate can cause trouble when trying to quicken lengthening in the face of premature consolidation or when trying to slow lengthening in the face of weak ossification. The only way to neutralize the implant and stop it from gaining length in an emergency situation is to perform additional surgery to set an external fixator around the nail to lock rotation. Additional complications can lead to much higher cost. Dynamization (removal of upper or lower femoral screws to allow loading through newly formed bone rather than through nail) can cause between a 2 to 7 mm loss in height gain.

Fitbone

The Fitbone was invented by Dr. Augustin Betz and Dr. Rainer Baumgart in 1989 and has been continuously developed with improvements since then. It is a telescopic nail that is driven by a small electric motor located at the end of it. Distraction is caused by forces from the motor that transmit to the internal nail and force it to lengthen. The energy for the fitbone motor is transmitted through the skin from an external transmitter controlled by the patient to the receiver under the skin.


Link to a demonstration of the Fitbone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6qFbZfFW1Q


Advantages: Minimal scarring. No pin sites. Reduced risk of joint stiffness, infection, and pain. Greater comfort and tolerance compared to externals and other internal methods. No soft tissue tethering due to lack of pin sites.

Disadvantages: Far more costly than external methods and other internal methods. Not weight bearing, leading to muscle weakness and prolonging recovery. Additional surgery required for consolidation phase to add stronger nail. More complications than other internals due to mechanical nature of the device. Dynamization (removal of upper or lower femoral screws to allow loading through newly formed bone rather than through nail) can cause between a 2 to 7 mm loss in height gain.

PRECISE System

The Precise System is an internal limb lengthening device that is controlled externally by a magnetic field generator called an External remote Controller (ERC). The internal device consists of a telescopic titanium rod that is placed into the bone cavity of the limb being lengthened and held by screws. Within the rod is a small magnetic motor and gear box that creates force needed to lengthen the rod. The external magnetic field generator powers the internal motor and is pressed onto the skin outside the leg for few minute intervals several times a day. that is held on the skin next to the leg several times a day.


Link to a CGI demonstration of the PRECISE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qXu8UDtoYY

Advantages: Reduced risk of joint stiffness, infection, and pain. Greater comfort and tolerance compared to externals.  Fewer scars. No soft tissue tethering as with external methods. More reliable than Fitbone or ISKD.

Disadvantages: Very costly. Not full weight-bearing, leading to muscle weakness. Current nail can lengthen a maximum of 6.5 cm.
Logged
Surgery performed by Dr Mangal Parihar at Mangal Anand Center for Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction. http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=634.0
Pre-surgery height:  164 cm (Surgery on 6/25/2014)
Post-surgery height: 170 cm (Frames removed 6/29/2015)

TomD

  • Private
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 382
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #1 on: October 14, 2013, 10:42:08 PM »

Excellent Read!!!

I enjoyed it.

Thank you for this  :)
Logged

ChrisIsaak

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 477
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #2 on: October 14, 2013, 10:53:57 PM »

Thank you, Kilokahn! Great information  :)

I'll be able to share information regarding the current Fitbone nail price on October 24th-25th. From what I've heard, a single nail costs €16,000, so two nails would cost €32,000 ($43,000). However, I haven't confirmed the price yet, it might be higher, and this amount doesn't include hospital and doctor costs.
Logged

NBW

  • Newbie
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 55
  • 5'3"
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2013, 05:31:45 AM »

This is great. A very nice and easy to read representation of the methods. Thanks!
Logged

KiloKAHN

  • Moderator
  • Premier Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2105
  • Digital Devil
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #4 on: October 15, 2013, 08:03:38 PM »

Thanks guys. I figured we needed something that gave a rundown of the various lengthening methods. We need to get more medical aspects of lengthening on here. Hopefully this topic can get stickied. 
Logged
Surgery performed by Dr Mangal Parihar at Mangal Anand Center for Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction. http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=634.0
Pre-surgery height:  164 cm (Surgery on 6/25/2014)
Post-surgery height: 170 cm (Frames removed 6/29/2015)

kneehowguys

  • Newbie
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2013, 07:22:47 PM »

Can you gather info on

1. Guichet nail
2. Fitbone nail
3. Jamal nail
4. HLN
5. Precise 2
Logged

TomD

  • Private
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 382
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #6 on: October 20, 2013, 07:25:36 PM »

Good call kneehowguys.

Logged

KiloKAHN

  • Moderator
  • Premier Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 2105
  • Digital Devil
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #7 on: October 20, 2013, 11:31:21 PM »

Can you gather info on

1. Guichet nail
2. Fitbone nail
3. Jamal nail
4. HLN
5. Precise 2

I'll get started on that.
Logged
Surgery performed by Dr Mangal Parihar at Mangal Anand Center for Limb Lengthening & Reconstruction. http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=634.0
Pre-surgery height:  164 cm (Surgery on 6/25/2014)
Post-surgery height: 170 cm (Frames removed 6/29/2015)

Medium Drink Of Water

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1938
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #8 on: October 21, 2013, 12:07:43 AM »

This is a picture of patient Dong Mei at the Beijing Institute of External Fixation wearing Dr. Xia's modified Ilizarov frame with the Dynamic Lengthener.  It's a hinged, spring-loaded heel attachment with adjustable tension.  It prevents ballerina foot and is why Beijing patients typically lengthen their tibiae by greater amounts than patients elsewhere.  Dong Mei ended up lengthening 12cm on her tibiae.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2013, 12:09:33 AM by Medium Drink Of Water »
Logged
Gained 3 inches on tibias (Ilizarov LON) in 2007 at the Beijing Institute of External Skeletal Fixation Technology with Prof. Hetao Xia and Dr. Aiming Peng.

If you have any questions, ask them here rather than by Private Message:
http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=64544

Adriano

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 183
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #9 on: October 21, 2013, 02:47:22 AM »

Very nice long legs :D
Logged

Adriano

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 183
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #10 on: October 21, 2013, 02:48:08 AM »

the frame doesnt even look bulky!!
Logged

Medium Drink Of Water

  • Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1938
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #11 on: October 21, 2013, 02:37:03 PM »

They come in multiple sizes.  Girls usually get the little frames like the ones Dong Mei has on. :)
Logged
Gained 3 inches on tibias (Ilizarov LON) in 2007 at the Beijing Institute of External Skeletal Fixation Technology with Prof. Hetao Xia and Dr. Aiming Peng.

If you have any questions, ask them here rather than by Private Message:
http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=64544

Drybone

  • Visitor
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #12 on: October 21, 2013, 11:16:22 PM »


Why do you have to wear rings like that? I never understood that. I have seen guys in photos who never had rings. Curious.
Logged

Adriano

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 183
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #13 on: October 22, 2013, 02:10:59 AM »

They come in multiple sizes.  Girls usually get the little frames like the ones Dong Mei has on. :)

Thats very interesting because i was very close to going for the Salameh-fix (excuse my spelling if its wrong)
The doctor agreed to let me return home to lengthen. but I wasnt sure if i could relly hide the device under my pants and return to work on a part-time basis. ( have a desk job)

The war in syria helped me make up my mind very quickly :D

And for the prices he charges outside Syria, i may as well save up for an internal nail with Jamal
Logged

GetTallOrGoGay

  • Visitor
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 23
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #14 on: October 22, 2013, 11:15:05 AM »

That heel attachment is awesome
Logged

TomD

  • Private
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 382
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2013, 12:28:01 PM »

Why do you have to wear rings like that? I never understood that. I have seen guys in photos who never had rings. Curious.

Drybone

Go read the Introduction section to leg lengthening. It describes all of the techniques used. Some are external and some are internal.
Logged

Goodhead

  • Visitor
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #16 on: October 24, 2013, 01:15:53 AM »



Hello everyone .My name is David even though some call me Jasmine. I found this site through a friend who comes here.

I am a banking professional who would love to learn more about becoming taller. I have been a short guy my whole life and it is a miracle that we can finally do something about it.

I look forward to meeting all of you .
Logged

mediocre

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2014, 04:57:22 PM »

This is a link to patient's guide for Precice limb lengthening.

Logged

Muse

  • Guest
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2014, 05:28:00 PM »

Logged

mediocre

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 359
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #19 on: February 23, 2014, 06:28:06 PM »

Another links, each by Dr Paley and Dr RR on retrospective analysis of Precice 1.
Note that there are cases of lengthening failure if the magnet is held backward. ;)

http://www.llrs.org/PDFs/Annual%20Meeting%20Presentations/Friday%20Meeting/9.Harris.pdf

http://www.llrs.org/PDFs/Annual%20Meeting%20Presentations/Friday%20Meeting/5.Kirane.pdf
Logged

MAN-OF-STEEL

  • Newbie
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 48
  • It's not an S
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #20 on: March 25, 2014, 03:16:46 AM »

Great info!
Logged

Wannabegiant

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 774
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #21 on: June 26, 2014, 11:38:20 AM »

One thing i dont understand about this guide is this piece on the LATN method:

"Advantages:Requires only 1/3 of the time wearing an external fixator as compared to the purely external method. Quicker bone healing rate than pure external method.Lower rate of infection than LON. Infections can be treated more easily and gradually during lengthening due to absence of intramedullary nail present in LON method during lengthening phase. Larger diameter nail than the one used in LON method is inserted into bone cavity during consolidation, allowing greater stability and increased protection against re-fracture."

How come LATN has quicker bone healing than pure external? is this accurate? Because it doesnt seem to make sense to me.
Logged

Taller

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1088
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #22 on: June 26, 2014, 03:34:21 PM »

The same post also says "(LON) Doesn’t appear to reduce the duration needed for bones to heal compared to purely external method. "
Logged

Moose

  • Newbie
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 90
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #23 on: February 18, 2015, 02:59:52 AM »

any chance we can get an update on the methods for precice and betzbone whatnot or other new methods? Thank you!
Logged
Mod Note: Currently Banned for violating rules

texasbruce

  • Newbie
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 77
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #24 on: February 03, 2016, 04:40:00 PM »

PRECISE 2 GOES HERE:

http://ellipse-tech.com/precice-limb-lengthening-technology/

Product Benefits

  • Proprietary magnet technology
  • Precision rate control
  • Non-invasive adjustment via external remote controller
  • Customizable lengthening protocol based upon patient’s prescription
  • Up to 80 mm of non-invasive distraction capability
  • Available in three diameters (8.5 mm, 10.7 mm and 12.5 mm)
  • Device is reversible

Same disadvantage as PRECISE 1, but some doctors from patients' diaries mentioned less trauma and more "precise" surgical experience.

Weight bearing depends on the nail the doctor uses:
http://ellipse-tech.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/P2-Femur-Operative-Technique-LC0083-A.pdf


8.5 mm = 30 lbs
10.7/12.5 mm = 50 lbs
« Last Edit: February 03, 2016, 06:14:57 PM by texasbruce »
Logged

Deads

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 418
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #25 on: February 03, 2016, 06:08:39 PM »

Can we have Jamal Nail included in here?
Logged

TheLichKing

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Gender: Male
  • Posts: 138
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #26 on: May 09, 2016, 12:33:47 AM »

This is a picture of patient Dong Mei at the Beijing Institute of External Fixation wearing Dr. Xia's modified Ilizarov frame with the Dynamic Lengthener.  It's a hinged, spring-loaded heel attachment with adjustable tension.  It prevents ballerina foot and is why Beijing patients typically lengthen their tibiae by greater amounts than patients elsewhere.  Dong Mei ended up lengthening 12cm on her tibiae.

12 cm on tibiae? That's about 4.7 inches where as the safe margin is a max 3-3.5 inch I believe. How did she manage to attain that amount on the tibiae alone w/o serious complications?
Logged
"When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe, then you'll be successful." -Eric Thomas

Current height - 168.5 cm: 5'6.5
Goal - 180 cm: 5'11
*2 segments (femurs-6.5 cm) + (tibia-5 cm)=11.5 cm: 4.5''

BiggestProblem

  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 168
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #27 on: November 06, 2016, 11:46:58 PM »

Sticky this in information. Not discussion.
Logged
Height: 166cm
Wingspan: 168cm

Finishing school before doing surgery. Most likely to just do tibias to become at least 170cm.

divinggirls

  • Visitor
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #28 on: January 12, 2017, 12:31:31 PM »

No mention of knee pain of internal methods???
Logged
Current height: 157 cm
Goal: 165 cm
Considering tibia 6.5 to 8 cm on tibia in 2019

sandman51

  • Visitor
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #29 on: March 11, 2017, 03:09:42 PM »

I'm not sure if I understood correctly, the LATN procedure requires three separate surgeries?
The first one for breaking the bones and installing the external Ilizarov frames. A second one for inserting the nail, after lengthening and before consolidation, and a third surgery after consolidation for removing the nails?.
Is it three surgeries?
Logged

doomsday

  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 346
Re: Limb Lengthening Methods
« Reply #30 on: March 11, 2017, 09:53:04 PM »

Yes it is 3 surgeries but its the best method for tibias.  With the fastest recovery time.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up