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!
Question about single segment vs quad lengthening
Quote from: breakmylegs on September 01, 2023, 07:27:10 PMBased on my long term lurking in this sub, Quad lengthening is not only gonna keep you crippled for longer, but Tibias are also full of complications, and do you really want to risk tibia problems while your femurs are completely broken?
Many before you have been given this advice, but I'll repeat it:
Lengthen your Femurs first, heal and rehabilitate then come back for tibia lengthening.
You'd be 5'10 after femurs anyway, 5'11-6' in shoes, and your proportions would look amazing.
Just my opinion.
Cheers for the input. Makes sense to do them separately.
Quote from: TheDream on September 01, 2023, 07:59:48 PMI dont think anyone would notice or suspect 6 cm tibias even at a pool.
The main reason for splitting it into quad would be to restore the 0.8 tibia to femur ratio as going away from this ratio has shown to cause health problems long term. Also reducing chances of ACL, ballerina etc. from going 6 cm tibia.
But the minimum quad Id say is 3.2 tibia + 4.0 femur so you keep the 0.8 tibia to femur ratio afterwards.
What sort of long term health problems are you referring to? Cheers
Quote from: lessthanavg8300 on September 01, 2023, 11:34:19 PMAbsolutely not. Quad is for giga short people or those doing absurd lengths. You're 5'8.5 and talking about a modest amount. Just do femurs if you really want to do this. Your proportions will look fine.
Thanks, guess I should really do some mock ups.
You must be logged in to post a reply.