Exactly how painful is this procedure?

Edit Post

Hi Biggerdreams,
After your surgery, most of the time (depending on your anaesthesiologist, which should discuss with you your pain management) you will be attached to an intravenous drip which will distill your pain medications. If you are in pain you can vocalise that with the nursing team who will most likely increase your dosage. After your hospital stay you will most likely be managing your pain with oral medications which you can take at your own comfort. Just be vocal with your doctors!

Edit Post

Quote from: Winterishere on October 27, 2017, 03:20:04 AMThe majority of these complications occur in both techniques, and infections are more common in external devices in almost all studies I have read. Internal devices are universally considered by most surgeons to be safer and more practical. If you personally prefer the external approach that is entirely your opinion and I hope it worked/works out for you!

yes infections occur in both techniques, but you can't be naive and say that infections within the bone canal is the same as pin site infections lol

All surgeons in every other country says that the external approach is much safer.
Even US surgeons do not say that internal is "safer" for the patient. They say that it is more practical and the pt will have less pain and will not have to wear an external fixator for a long time + faster recovery.

This does not take away from the complications listed that can occur.

Edit Post

Getting a rod reamed inside your femur bone canal is not less invasive than an external approach


Why do majority of orthopedic surgeons use an external device on children when dealing with leg length discrepancies?

Edit Post

I never stated it was less invasive, just preferable to many people including myself. Infections can occur at the site of the bone in an external approach just the same as an internal one. When your bone is 'caved' in preparation for the insertion of the rod the area is highly sterilised and therefore with a reputable surgeon infections are remarkably rare. External devices are used on children because they are still growing, and therefore an internal device is not preferable since the bone has not fully developed. Internal devices would only ever be used on children for periods of shorter than 30 days to repair sustained injuries, along with other considerably rare circumstances. Hope this helped!

Edit Post

Quote from: Winterishere on October 27, 2017, 03:49:46 AMI never stated it was less invasive, just preferable to many people including myself. Infections can occur at the site of the bone in an external approach just the same as an internal one. When your bone is 'caved' in preparation for the insertion of the rod the area is highly sterilised and therefore with a reputable surgeon infections are remarkably rare. External devices are used on children because they are still growing, and therefore an internal device is not preferable since the bone has not fully developed. Internal devices would only ever be used on children for periods of shorter than 30 days to repair sustained injuries, along with other considerably rare circumstances. Hope this helped!

If it is not less invasive, how can it possibly be safer? And not using the intramedullary rod on kids because they are still growing should tell you a lot about how invasive the internal surgery really is and the damage it can do.

Infections that can occur with internal approach (rare if rod is perfectly sterilised but can still happen). These infections can lead to amputations...
On the other hand, pin site infections are common and easy to take care of.

You cannot compare the two lol.

Also, what will you do if you develop x legs? You can't do anything if you're undergoing an internal method of lengthening. But you can fix misalignments with external fixators..

Edit Post

Creating a linear comparison between the invasive nature of each procedure with safety probably isn't accurate. If an external device is what you believe is safer then I completely respect that opinion. Good luck!

Edit Post

Quote from: Winterishere on October 27, 2017, 03:59:35 AMCreating a linear comparison between the invasive nature of each procedure with safety probably isn't accurate. If an external device is what you believe is safer then I completely respect that opinion. Good luck!

Thanks. I just wanted to put some evidence out there of why I believe external approach is a lot safer and less invasive so pts can make the best decisions for themselves knowing the facts.

Edit Post

Yes thats a great idea! Everyone should voice their opinions in healthy arguments and it was actually a very informative read for me so thank-you

Edit Post

Quote from: MirinHeight on October 27, 2017, 04:01:32 AMThanks. I just wanted to put some evidence out there of why I believe external approach is a lot safer and less invasive so pts can make the best decisions for themselves knowing the facts.

Do you think LON or LATN are just as safe as standard Ilizarov?

Edit Post

Quote from: farmerjohn1324 on October 27, 2017, 10:40:22 AMDo you think LON or LATN are just as safe as standard Ilizarov?

no; they involve intra-medullary reaming of the bone canal too, which carries the same risk as standard internal precise lengthening.