Quote from: Bruce Wayne on May 11, 2018, 06:43:49 AMI wonder why he doesn't encourage unilateral if it's good for the patients' safety and more money for him also.
If the risk of fat embolism syndrome is that low, I'd rather decrease the number of times I get operated on under general anesthesia.
Dr. Paley has seen fat embolism syndrome 4 times in his career. All from BILATERAL FEMOR LENGTHENING. And I don't buy him saying he's done 250 bilateral cosmetic leg lengthening surgeries. Compare that to the thousands of unilateral orthopedic surgeries for deformity and lengthening he has done up to this point without seeing a single Fat embolism syndrome.
the risk of dying from general anesthesia is 1 in 100,000. And you can't even say "but what about the risk of an allergic reaction from the anesthesia?" This won't be possible because you would have already been operated on under the same damn anesthesia the first time around. So it is foolish for anyone to not consider a unilateral lengthening because you think the risk of anesthesia is somehow higher than the risk of fat embolism syndrome from a bilateral lengthening. That must be one of the dumbest things I've read on here.
If you don't think 2% risk of fat embolism is significant, then you have little value for your life.
Fact is you won't even have to pay the 30k extra for unilateral lengthening if you have a good insurance and you go to Dr. Rozbruch...
You can do what you like man after doing your own research. I just want to get the surgery done with the lowest risk possible, even if it costs me more $..
Quote from: MirinHeight on May 11, 2018, 07:41:50 AMDr. Paley has seen fat embolism syndrome 4 times in his career. All from BILATERAL FEMOR LENGTHENING. And I don't buy him saying he's done 250 bilateral cosmetic leg lengthening surgeries. Compare that to the thousands of unilateral orthopedic surgeries for deformity and lengthening he has done up to this point without seeing a single Fat embolism syndrome.
the risk of dying from general anesthesia is 1 in 100,000. And you can't even say "but what about the risk of an allergic reaction from the anesthesia?" This won't be possible because you would have already been operated on under the same damn anesthesia the first time around. So it is foolish for anyone to not consider a unilateral lengthening because you think the risk of anesthesia is somehow higher than the risk of fat embolism syndrome from a bilateral lengthening. That must be one of the dumbest things I've read on here.
If you don't think 2% risk of fat embolism is significant, then you have little value for your life.
Fact is you won't even have to pay the 30k extra for unilateral lengthening if you have a good insurance and you go to Dr. Rozbruch...
You can do what you like man after doing your own research. I just want to get the surgery done with the lowest risk possible, even if it costs me more $..
wont the doctors look for fat embolism anyway and make sure you are okay regardless?
Never mentioned mortality risk with general anesthesia, that's your interpretation; I just meant that it's a hassle and stressful on the body to go through additional surgeries. That being said, my grandmother died due to a mistake in administering general anesthesia; she went under and never woke up.
Not trying to have anyone agree with me, it's just my opinion of what I'd do. The odds are very good, and the reward outweigh the risks. Even if you are unlucky and get FES, your chances of survival is high.
I suppose I got subjective. I'm not answering the topic objectively.
The best way to increase the chances of success on the operating table is to consult with several doctors, get their opinions, and listen to them instead of relying too heavily on the opinions of strangers on the internet.
Chances of dying in an airplane crash = 1 : 11.000.000
Chances of dying in a car crash = 1 : 5.000
So yes, 1-2 : 100 is real significant. But he might have meant that 1-2% is the chances of significant complications (that can be treated) and not dying.
Quote from: Bruce Wayne on May 11, 2018, 09:17:23 AMChances of dying in an airplane crash = 1 : 11.000.000
Chances of dying in a car crash = 1 : 5.000
So yes, 1-2 : 100 is real significant. But he might have meant that 1-2% is the chances of significant complications (that can be treated) and not dying.
Do keep in mind that we travel a lot more often than we get operated on. I'd take the 1-2% risk. Again, my opinion.
Correct, he has never had a person die from FES. Risk of death by FES is 10-20% if you get it at all, so mortality is fraction of a percent (20% of 2% is 0.004%). It is not a death sentence.
how are the odds of a car crash 1:5000? 
most people drive 10 times a week. so in 10-15 years everyone should have been involved in a car crash? think of third world countries like Vietnam where traffic is very chaotic.
Quote from: MirinHeight on May 11, 2018, 07:41:50 AMDr. Paley has seen fat embolism syndrome 4 times in his career. All from BILATERAL FEMOR LENGTHENING. And I don't buy him saying he's done 250 bilateral cosmetic leg lengthening surgeries. Compare that to the thousands of unilateral orthopedic surgeries for deformity and lengthening he has done up to this point without seeing a single Fat embolism syndrome.
the risk of dying from general anesthesia is 1 in 100,000. And you can't even say "but what about the risk of an allergic reaction from the anesthesia?" This won't be possible because you would have already been operated on under the same damn anesthesia the first time around. So it is foolish for anyone to not consider a unilateral lengthening because you think the risk of anesthesia is somehow higher than the risk of fat embolism syndrome from a bilateral lengthening. That must be one of the dumbest things I've read on here.
If you don't think 2% risk of fat embolism is significant, then you have little value for your life.
Fact is you won't even have to pay the 30k extra for unilateral lengthening if you have a good insurance and you go to Dr. Rozbruch...
You can do what you like man after doing your own research. I just want to get the surgery done with the lowest risk possible, even if it costs me more $..
Paley and his team consider and monitor for FE so I wouldn't be as worried about it. If it's been accounted as something that can happen and the team is prepared and takes measures for it, it doesn't seem as concerning. Compartment syndrome sounds much scarier to me.
Quote from: Android on May 11, 2018, 09:48:08 AMDo keep in mind that we travel a lot more often than we get operated on. I'd take the 1-2% risk. Again, my opinion.
Correct, he has never had a person die from FES. Risk of death by FES is 10-20% if you get it at all, so mortality is fraction of a percent (20% of 2% is 0.004%). It is not a death sentence.
Isn't it 0.4%?
That is comparatively much higher than the car crash scenario (0.02%), but given that it'd be just once or twice in our whole lives... (I'm assuming removing the IM nails can also trigger FE, but I'm not sure.)
Quote from: fokid on May 11, 2018, 10:40:18 AMhow are the odds of a car crash 1:5000? most people drive 10 times a week. so in 10-15 years everyone should have been involved in a car crash? think of third world countries like Vietnam where traffic is very chaotic.
Yeah, I'm not sure where Bruce got his numbers from.
https://www.thrillist.com/cars/nation/how-likely-you-are-to-die-in-a-car-accident-in-every-us-state-the-most-dangerous-roads-in-america
It seems it can vary drastically.
I'm not sure if Bruce's numbers refer to normal city traffic or road traffic, either. I'd say that's an important distinction to make.
Either way, it really puts driving into perspective.
https://www.iii.org/fact-statistic/facts-statistics-mortality-risk
(Lifetime chance of dying in a car accident, as the occupant, being 0.15% according to this last link.)
You must be logged in to post a reply.
