Hi everyone,
I've been considering this procedure for years and the deterrent has been the lengthy recover phase/immobility. To my mind, it would seemingly make more sense to lengthen one leg at a time. Barring an apocalypse and ending up with one leg longer than the other, I'm not seeing the disadvantages other than taking twice as long to reach your height.
The advantages I'm seeing are:
Crutches from day 1? (as opposed to wheelchair)
Much more mobile/functional life
Body only needs to heal/grow one leg
What am I missing? I realize expenditures would increase as you'd have twice as many trips, more hospital expenses...
I just truly hate the thought of being in a wheelchair for months. I feel like I would lose considerable amount of cardiovascular strength...
Any thoughts?
Related Medical Evidence Peer-Reviewed
Posted on Dec 28, 2017, 11:45 pm
#1
You must be logged in to post a reply.
Related Topics
How about the German guy who did 18cm in livelifetaller now?
Minkowski
2 replies • 1 week ago
Limb lengthening costs in London GP clinics versus private hospitals Which is cheaper
mason_f89
7 replies • 2 weeks ago
Limb lengthening surgery above 40: Is it still a viable option for height increase
sofia2000
7 replies • 3 weeks ago
Stryde Nail 2024 Results: Is This the Future of Femur Lengthening Surgery
mike_t
7 replies • 3 weeks ago
Precice Stryde nail vs traditional lengthening methods which is safer
victoria1991
7 replies • 3 weeks ago
Precice nail surgical technique: Does it outperform LON method for femur lengthening
owen_b
7 replies • 3 weeks ago