7 CM on Tibias (LON with Dr. Solomin)--good idea or bad?

Edit Post

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15891539/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8990026/

Edit Post

Quote from: Thehighest on December 16, 2021, 03:37:32 AMhttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15891539/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8990026/

Looks like I have to suck it up and do pure externals, then.

Edit Post

I will take the risk no way you can saty in frames for a year, take the risk if there is pain is minimal

Edit Post

Quote from: Thehighest on January 20, 2022, 02:21:11 AMI will take the risk no way you can saty in frames for a year, take the risk if there is pain is minimal

There's always a compromise: I can do the lengthening for 2-3 months, and if I REALLY can't stand it, then I'll go ahead with lengthening and then nailing. If I think I can take it, then I'll go ahead with wearing the frames for 8-10 months or so.

Edit Post

Lengthening under 15-20% of length of bones is Dr.Lee's theory and Dr.Paley's study has proven that going beyond 5cm on tibias will exponentially increase the potiential risks of surgery so you better listen to both sides.
I suggest for 15cm you better do Paley's Option 3 which requires rebreaking to achieve the amount what you want.

Edit Post

I don't have the money for Paley's option, but Dr. Catagni and Peng have been lengthening over 5 cm for a while without any problems. However, I'm considering going for 15% of my initial limb length; the limb length theory is generally accepted by every doctor in the field I've seen.

Edit Post

Quote from: ReadRothbard on January 25, 2022, 03:28:51 PMI don't have the money for Paley's option, but Dr. Catagni and Peng have been lengthening over 5 cm for a while without any problems. However, I'm considering going for 15% of my initial limb length; the limb length theory is generally accepted by every doctor in the field I've seen.

15% is the 'safety' threshold and 20% is the maxium lengthening amount. So going over 15% of the bones can be feasible but the safety will for sure be negative influenced by the lengthening amount over than 15% of the bone lengths.
I still don't think lengthening around 7cm on tibia is safe enough and you gotta know if you become disabled after LL then how tall you are can't make senses anymore unless you think disabled is better than short.

Edit Post

Quote from: Mulholland Dr on January 25, 2022, 03:36:19 PM15% is the 'safety' threshold and 20% is the maxium lengthening amount. So going over 15% of the bones can be feasible but the safety will for sure be negative influenced by the lengthening amount over than 15% of the bone lengths.
I still don't think lengthening around 7cm on tibia is safe enough and you gotta know if you become disabled after LL then how tall you are can't make senses anymore unless you think disabled is better than short.

I don't think it's as clear as that. These ranges are probabilistic--i.e. some people can lengthen 4 cm and be crippled if things go wrong and they don't listen to their doctor, while some can lengthen 10 cm and fully recover if everything goes swimmingly and they take the procedure seriously. Of course, I'm not going to insist on x amount; I'll start the lengthening, see how things develop from their, and decide accordingly.

Edit Post

Quote from: ReadRothbard on January 25, 2022, 03:28:51 PMI don't have the money for Paley's option, but Dr. Catagni and Peng have been lengthening over 5 cm for a while without any problems. However, I'm considering going for 15% of my initial limb length; the limb length theory is generally accepted by every doctor in the field I've seen.

Hi,
By ''limb length theory'' you mean the threshold of 15/20% of initial bone lenght or the 7cm ''threshold'' (for some)?

Edit Post

Quote from: zaozari on February 24, 2022, 07:48:25 PMHi,
By ''limb length theory'' you mean the threshold of 15/20% of initial bone lenght or the 7cm ''threshold'' (for some)?

Yes