Lengthening Amount Recommended

Edit Post

I see that Paley offers Stryde for internal tibias. what are the advantages of doing tibia internally?

I am a female, small-boned, i am scared that there are no small enough STRYDE nails to do tibia internally. i dont wnat to do femurs cause they are already very long for my body (short torso and tibias). but i want to use STRYDE cause it is the only thing that justifies for me doing this procedure at Paley's ($$$$$)/in my 30th (finally can afford it)

please advise

Edit Post

Quote from: PAGrb490 on June 19, 2018, 05:36:44 PMwhat are the advantages of doing tibia internally?

Much more comfortable to sleep with than external fixators, reduced risk of infection, can be completely hidden under pants/tights.

External fixators are weight-bearing, but with STRYDE, that's also the case - if there are thin enough nails for your tibias.

Quote from: PAGrb490 on June 19, 2018, 05:36:44 PMI am a female, small-boned, i am scared that there are no small enough STRYDE nails to do tibia internally

Have you asked Dr. Paley what is the smallest diameter STRYDE nail that they have?

Edit Post

I'm sorry OYG but I have to contradict you
It is generally known that for tibias the best method is External with Ilizarov
It is way less invasive than putting nails inside a bone
Infections with Externals when occur can be easilly treated with local meds due to being external infections while infections with Internals are way more dangerous and can lead to osteomyelitis and in the worst case amputation
Ilizarov also allows to do more accurate corrections of misalignments
The best method for tibias is external and anyone denying it is simply wrong

Edit Post

If the best method for tibia is Ilizarov (external), then why Paley is not offering it? Why he is doing internal only for tibia?

Edit Post

Quote from: The Dreamer on June 19, 2018, 07:52:03 PMI'm sorry OYG but I have to contradict you
It is generally known that for tibias the best method is External with Ilizarov
It is way less invasive than putting nails inside a bone
Infections with Externals when occur can be easilly treated with local meds due to being external infections while infections with Internals are way more dangerous and can lead to osteomyelitis and in the worst case amputation
Ilizarov also allows to do more accurate corrections of misalignments
The best method for tibias is external and anyone denying it is simply wrong

I disagree. The external frames makes it very painful to do stretching exercises/therapy. With internal, you don't have the pins pulling at your flesh while you are stretching. Sure the infections can easily be treated but they are still painful.

Also, I may be ignorant on this, but I don't think the external frames allow rate control/reversal like Precice.

I can't comment about the likelihood of osteomyelitis with Precice.

Edit Post

Quote from: Purushrottam on June 19, 2018, 10:18:42 PMI disagree. The external frames makes it very painful to do stretching exercises/therapy. With internal, you don't have the pins pulling at your flesh while you are stretching. Sure the infections can easily be treated but they are still painful.

Also, I may be ignorant on this, but I don't think the external frames allow rate control/reversal like Precice.

I can't comment about the likelihood of osteomyelitis with Precice.

From experience external tibias were fairly comfortable. Pins werent painful at all. I did get a minor infection but was cured fast with antibiotics. Also external frames do allow controlled lengthening and reversal as well. If we talk about external frames on femur then yes thats very painful atleast it was for me and i had alot of pin cutting and pulling but tibia was a breaze to lengthen. Hardest part was getting rid of ballerina foot but that would be hard with internal as well.

Edit Post

Quote from: Jim_dabarber on June 20, 2018, 02:09:19 AMFrom experience external tibias were fairly comfortable. Pins werent painful at all. I did get a minor infection but was cured fast with antibiotics. Also external frames do allow controlled lengthening and reversal as well. If we talk about external frames on femur then yes thats very painful atleast it was for me and i had alot of pin cutting and pulling but tibia was a breaze to lengthen. Hardest part was getting rid of ballerina foot but that would be hard with internal as well.

My goodness! You did external femur? I heard thats painful AF. Hope you are doing well! Do you happen to know what makes external femurs particularly painful?

Edit Post

This thread is outdated. For multiple doctors

Edit Post

Quote from: Penguinn on November 10, 2016, 04:07:25 AMThere've been no long term studies linking LL to athritis, and except maybe LON, how?

Hey penguin. You said LL is linked with Arthiritis EXCEPT for LON, how is that? Does LON offer some advantages over any other type of lengthening?

Edit Post

From what I have read in various sources, the amount of lengthening one can add to height safely depends on many factors such as muscle flexibility, initial bone height, the patience of the patient etc. But for the majority of people, 7-8 cm is possible. Experiencing so called "ballerina syndrome" or difficulty in movement is frequently seen in people who go over 5-6 cm but that is a temporary condition and is absolutely curable with physio and exercises