Quote from: programdude on March 29, 2016, 05:29:45 PMShould be, for sure. But when you are breaking and stretching limbs you never know
How is your recovery going? Sprinting, explosiveness, vertical leap etc.
Edit: An 8cm height gain is impossible I believe (with the precise), do you know the exact number of cm´s and mm´s you´ve gained?
Quote from: Alittletooshort on March 29, 2016, 09:14:11 PMHow is your recovery going? Sprinting, explosiveness, vertical leap etc.
Edit: An 8cm height gain is impossible I believe (with the precise), do you know the exact number of cm´s and mm´s you´ve gained?
In his case, exact gain is less important. I've met PD and he looks comfortably tall. No woman would ever have an issue with his height.
Quote from: Alittletooshort on March 29, 2016, 09:14:11 PMHow is your recovery going? Sprinting, explosiveness, vertical leap etc.
Edit: An 8cm height gain is impossible I believe (with the precise), do you know the exact number of cm´s and mm´s you´ve gained?
In his case, exact gain is less important. I've met PD and he looks comfortably tall. No woman would ever have an issue with his height.
Quote from: YellowSpike on March 29, 2016, 10:48:40 PMIn his case, exact gain is less important. I've met PD and he looks comfortably tall. No woman would ever have an issue with his height.
He is 180 now no?
Quote from: YellowSpike on March 29, 2016, 10:48:40 PMIn his case, exact gain is less important. I've met PD and he looks comfortably tall. No woman would ever have an issue with his height.
The reason I was asking for an exact number, is that I´m still undecided weither I should do tibia or femur. One reason I´m leaning towards tibial lengthening is that it´s more "efficient" in terms of real height gains.
The femur has a curvature of approx. 7% so 8cm´s x 0.93 would result in a 6mm loss for 8cm´s, I just don´t know If my math is correct.
Quote from: Alittletooshort on March 29, 2016, 10:58:47 PMThe reason I was asking for an exact number, is that I´m still undecided weither I should do tibia or femur. One reason I´m leaning towards tibial lengthening is that it´s more "efficient" in terms of real height gains.
The femur has a curvature of approx. 7% so 8cm´s x 0.93 would result in a 6mm loss for 8cm´s, I just don´t know If my math is correct.
I don't know. I was 166, did 7cm and usually measure 173 at night, sometimes even as much as 173.3. I only know that the Gnail gives more than what you click. My X-rays showed a gap of I believe 8.4cm, minus 1 for X-ray discrepancy and I did around 7.3/7.4cm and seemed to have actually gained 7.
Quote from: Alittletooshort on March 29, 2016, 10:58:47 PMThe reason I was asking for an exact number, is that I´m still undecided weither I should do tibia or femur. One reason I´m leaning towards tibial lengthening is that it´s more "efficient" in terms of real height gains.
The femur has a curvature of approx. 7% so 8cm´s x 0.93 would result in a 6mm loss for 8cm´s, I just don´t know If my math is correct.
Although milometer for milometer Tibia lengthening is more efficient, the femur can withstand an overall longer lengthening due to its longer length. Another issue with tibia LL is that both the Tibia bone AND the fibula bone is broken. From my consultation with a top LL doctor, non-union of the fibula is common, but the doctor said it makes no practical difference when walking, doing daily activities. However personally I would like to keep it in tact because it's just weird to have 2 bones sticking out in your lower legs. Also, there have been debates about Achilles tendon lengthening which may or may not apply for 3-4cm. Nonetheless, still a risk factor due to apparently a weaker leg after ATL.
After weighing all the pros and cons, I'm actually leaning towards internal femurs now for a smaller amount like yourself. The only issue is that there will be a a milometer of mechanical axis deviation for every 1cm lengthened. So for 3-4cm, the mechanical axis is deviated by about 3-4mm. Which may or may not be an issue. I don't think I've heard any instances yet of problems due to this, even from people who've lengthening 5cm+.
Quote from: YellowSpike on March 29, 2016, 11:11:47 PMI don't know. I was 166, did 7cm and usually measure 173 at night, sometimes even as much as 173.3. I only know that the Gnail gives more than what you click. My X-rays showed a gap of I believe 8.4cm, minus 1 for X-ray discrepancy and I did around 7.3/7.4cm and seemed to have actually gained 7.
Is the mechanical axis deviation bothering you at all? Any pain in the knees? You must have around 7mm deviation which actually seems big.
Quote from: applesandoranges on March 29, 2016, 11:22:39 PMAlthough milometer for milometer Tibia lengthening is more efficient, the femur can withstand an overall longer lengthening due to its longer length. Another issue with tibia LL is that both the Tibia bone AND the fibula bone is broken. From my consultation with a top LL doctor, non-union of the fibula is common, but the doctor said it makes no practical difference when walking, doing daily activities. However personally I would like to keep it in tact because it's just weird to have 2 bones sticking out in your lower legs. Also, there have been debates about Achilles tendon lengthening which may or may not apply for 3-4cm. Nonetheless, still a risk factor due to apparently a weaker leg after ATL.
After weighing all the pros and cons, I'm actually leaning towards internal femurs now for a smaller amount like yourself. The only issue is that there will be a a milometer of mechanical axis deviation for every 1cm lengthened. So for 3-4cm, the mechanical axis is deviated by about 3-4mm. Which may or may not be an issue. I don't think I've heard any instances yet of problems due to this, even from people who've lengthening 5cm+.
The axis devaiation bothers me as well, I haven´t seen any long term studies on that topic. Perhaps the axis deviation is something serious long term but we just don´t know yet.
Now that monegal is off my list Birkholtz is the only LL Doc that in my budget atm so the price for internals is also an issue for me.
Quote from: Alittletooshort on March 30, 2016, 12:01:43 AMThe axis devaiation bothers me as well, I haven´t seen any long term studies on that topic. Perhaps the axis deviation is something serious long term but we just don´t know yet.
Now that monegal is off my list Birkholtz is the only LL Doc that in my budget atm so the price for internals is also an issue for me.
The axis deviation could be something that's overblown. Paley is supposed to have released a study that should alleviate these concerns (I haven't read it yet) and my own surgeon read the article about mechanical axis deviation and said that there were problems with it.
"Lot of potential problems with that article. It's a good hypothesis, but far from being proven yet. There are other articles that have shown the opposite (that there is no real change in the mechanical axis.)
a. They did not correlate the length achieved with the amount of axis deviation. If there is a cause-effect relationship, one should be able to show a positive correlation.
b. One patient actually moved in the opposite direction (medial axis deviation).
c. They state in the article that "Because of the potential for errors in measurement or radiological magnification, the data were analysed by considering a total shift in mechanical axis deviation of ≤ 2 mm to be inconsequential. With this assumption, further analysis of these 26 limbs showed that 15 limbs had an insignificant total lateral change in mechanical axis deviation of ≤ 2 mm”. i.e. >50% of the limbs did not have a significant change in the mechanical axis.
d. The correct comparison would be the immediate postoperative Axis, and the 6 month postoperative axis - because the surgery itself (osteotomy and insertion of the nail) may change the axis."
http://www.limblengtheningforum.com/index.php?topic=2783.0
You must be logged in to post a reply.