So what I gathered from your input –
The safest option is the femur and it is more precise (superior to g nail) and safer than the tibia. Achieving 8cm is quite feasible!
Let’s consider if I opt for tibia eventually, which approach do you suggest?
External or internal with the same precision? How can I ensure quicker healing and fewer issues with the feet, knees, etc.?
Or is it better to dismiss the tibia? Are complications inevitable? What if I prefer only 5cm?
The safest choice for the tibia is external since it decreases the risks related to fibular non-union.
Nevertheless, out of the two, femurs are always the safer option. Tibia nails are put in from the knee, and if the surgeon makes mistakes, it could lead to persistent pain. Conversely, nails in the femur can be introduced from the hip, eliminating this risk.
By the way, femurs also come with chronic problems; it simply relies on your fortune and the skill of the surgeon.
The most secure method is to schedule surgeries at least one year apart.
Femur Precice is certainly recommended first, followed by the Tibia. The Femur can be extended by 8cm.
If I were in your position, I would not exceed 4cm on the Tibia to prevent the risk of losing athletic skills.
Choosing internal tibia for limb lengthening is considered safer due to the significantly higher risk of infection associated with external tibia lengthening. There is no proof indicating that selecting internal tibia leads to a greater likelihood of fibula non-union.
I have had extensive discussions with several surgeons regarding limb lengthening. Internal tibia is significantly more favorable than external tibia, although there is a risk of deep infection that is extremely difficult to treat. Osteomyelitis should not be underestimated.
.