Posted on Sep 1, 2023, 7:10 pm
#1
I’ve always been focused on just doing the one segment, with my preference being tibias. At 5’8.5, the plan was to do external frames to get me to 5’11, which is a height I’d be happy at (to be at a lower height wouldn’t seem enough bang for buck).
I’d heard of quad lengthening where people do both tibias and femurs, but never really considered it as I wasn’t interested in gaining an immense amount of height. However, as I’ve learnt more about the procedure, other factors have made me consider it.
Obviously the main benefit of external tibias is the cost and the ability to weight bare, and the risk of fat embolism and non-union is going to be less with only doing one segment (and with fat embolism, much less just by the nature of the procedure).
One of the reasons I'm concerned with that, though, is that my proportions will look weird having done 6cm. Obviously people aren't going to be able to tell in clothes, but what about when you're in your underwear? (my tib/femur ratio is 0.8, btw)
Doing two segments would solve that issue obviously because then you could just do 3cm on both to have your proportions remain totally normal. In reality I'd probably do 3.5cm on each (obviously I know there's torso proportions to consider, but from what I've read on here, that's much less of an issue if you're not lengthening to the extremes).
I'd be going with Giotikas in either situation, and if I did both segments, i'd do externals on tibias and Precise for femurs. I'm guessing that although the it would prove a more difficult experience, you'd be finished quicker (any idea on the length of time for 3-3.5cm doing this? I know usually for externals on tibs only it's like 9 months) and potentially have less muscle and ligament issues with only doing a small amount on each bone.
Overall, it would appear quad lengthening is the healthier, less time consuming, and more aesthetic option, it just costs way more and I'd imagine is much more fatiguing to deal with.
Thoughts? Thanks!
I’d heard of quad lengthening where people do both tibias and femurs, but never really considered it as I wasn’t interested in gaining an immense amount of height. However, as I’ve learnt more about the procedure, other factors have made me consider it.
Obviously the main benefit of external tibias is the cost and the ability to weight bare, and the risk of fat embolism and non-union is going to be less with only doing one segment (and with fat embolism, much less just by the nature of the procedure).
One of the reasons I'm concerned with that, though, is that my proportions will look weird having done 6cm. Obviously people aren't going to be able to tell in clothes, but what about when you're in your underwear? (my tib/femur ratio is 0.8, btw)
Doing two segments would solve that issue obviously because then you could just do 3cm on both to have your proportions remain totally normal. In reality I'd probably do 3.5cm on each (obviously I know there's torso proportions to consider, but from what I've read on here, that's much less of an issue if you're not lengthening to the extremes).
I'd be going with Giotikas in either situation, and if I did both segments, i'd do externals on tibias and Precise for femurs. I'm guessing that although the it would prove a more difficult experience, you'd be finished quicker (any idea on the length of time for 3-3.5cm doing this? I know usually for externals on tibs only it's like 9 months) and potentially have less muscle and ligament issues with only doing a small amount on each bone.
Overall, it would appear quad lengthening is the healthier, less time consuming, and more aesthetic option, it just costs way more and I'd imagine is much more fatiguing to deal with.
Thoughts? Thanks!