Is 4 cm tibias+4 cm femurs safer and easier than doing 7-8 cm femurs?

Edit Post

If I understand it correctly, risk of complications isn't defined by how much you lengthen overall, but per segment. Would that mean that doing 4 cm on the femurs and then later 4 cm on the tibias is safer than doing 7 or 8 cm on the femurs only? Or does the increased risk from doing tibias (since most people agree femurs are safer) make them about equal in risk?

Also, does splitting the lengthening into 2 separate short surgeries/post-op recoveries like this make it more bearable? You lengthen 4 cm, a relatively small increase, then come back after a while and do the same instead of doing 8 cm in one difficult go?

Edit Post

Bump

Edit Post

Quote from: Robert Adam on December 03, 2023, 11:41:00 AMLengthening the femur and tibia by 8 cm together is much safer than making 8 cm in one segment. The best solution is a 4.5 cm femur and 3.6 cm tibia
Nice, so the increase in risk you get from introducing short tibial lengthening is still less than doing a large femoral lengthening with no tibia?

Edit Post

Quote from: Robert Adam on December 03, 2023, 01:28:08 PMI think that lengthening the tibia by 3.6 cm + 4.5 cm of the femur is a lower risk than 8 cm in the femur. The problem is twice the price.
And I assume breaking the lengthening into 2 smaller parts with time apart them probably makes it psychologically and physically easier right?

Edit Post

Quote from: Beemer m3 on December 04, 2023, 06:27:18 AMSave ur femurs for long growth past 4.5 cm. If ur spending 80k precicd 2 for 4.5 cm. That's alot and there's more meat in the bones that u cam extend to 6.5 cm.
Sure but I am concerned about tibia/femur proportions and the increased risk from being closer to the safety limit for femoral lengthening. I would love to just have to do one surgery and get it out of the way forever instead of two, but I don't like the idea of being stuck with abnormal looking legs for the rest of my life.

Edit Post

Quote from: Robert Adam on December 04, 2023, 05:44:28 AMBreaking the tibia is worse than the femur. Consolidation for 3.6 cm takes 2 months. Femur consolidation at 4.5 cm, takes 6 weeks. The 4th bones means better proportions and preserved mobility of movement.
But is it worse to the point where doing femoral lengthening closer to the safety limit is still safer than doing two short lengthenings well below the safety limit?

Edit Post

Quote from: Robert Adam on December 04, 2023, 12:08:25 PM8 cm for the femur is the limit. But the limit without complications is probably 5 cm.
OK, didn't know the "truly safe" limit was as low as that. So, for my last question, which of these two is safer:
7 cm femur
4 cm femur, 3 cm tibia

Edit Post

Quote from: Beemer m3 on December 04, 2023, 12:30:55 PMtheres a guy on this forum that did 7 cm on his femur n 1.3 inches on his tibia. his name is height journey on youtube. hes pretty tall now. theres also alot of videos on youtube that does it on all four sides. there mainly like 10 cm+.
What do you mean by 4 sides? I thought it was 2 segments, femur and tibia, though  I have heard the term "quadrilateral" before. Sorry still a noob when it comes to LL and trying to inform myself.

Edit Post

Quote from: Robert Adam on December 04, 2023, 02:53:16 PMThere are different opinions. I think that doing 3 cm in the tibia and 6 months later 4 cm in the femur is better, than 7 cm only in the femur.
Quote from: Robert Adam on December 04, 2023, 02:53:16 PM3 cm for the tibia is safe, 4 cm for the femur is very safe. I haven't seen any comments about complications when the tibia is lengthened by less than 4 cm and the femur by less than 5 cm.
Thanks, I'll keep it in my mind when I have a consultation in the distant hypothetical future.

Edit Post

Quote from: Beemer m3 on December 05, 2023, 06:20:03 AM4 sides I meant by quadrilateral but didn't know how to spell it lol
So 4 sides/quadrilateral means 2 segments * 2 legs?