Limb Lengthening Research Papers
Case Study
Cosmetic limb lengthening in a patient of normal stature: ethical considerations
KARTHIK VISHWANATHAN, SOMASHEKHAR NIMBALKAR
Page 1 - Abstract
Recently, a 23-year-old male patient underwent cosmetic limb
lengthening, despite the fact that his height was that of the
average Indian male (5 feet 7 inches). The patient’s parents and
the media criticised the orthopaedic surgeon who had performed
the surgery for undertaking an unethical operation. This paper
discusses the relevant clinical evidence, ethical aspects and ethical
theories surrounding the case. We conclude that the surgeon’s
decision to perform the surgery seems to be fair and appropriate
from the ethical and clinical perspectives.
Introduction
The Ilizarov external device is usually used to lengthen a
bone that is shortened due to bone loss secondary to trauma,
infection, non-union of bone or congenital conditions giving
rise to short bones. Recently, there was news regarding a
limb lengthening surgery that was performed by a team of
orthopaedic surgeons at a reputed hospital in Hyderabad (1).
The procedure was controversial because it was performed on
a young man whose height was 5 feet 7 inches (approximately
170.2 cm), which is considered above average for an Indian
male. This case has given rise to a nationwide debate, especially
among the medical fraternity, on whether this procedure was
performed ethically or otherwise. The view of the newspaper
itself is that the patient’s parents should have been consulted
as the patient was only 23 years old.
Current clinical evidence
One paper (2) described the results of cosmetic limb
lengthening among persons of normal height, while two
papers (3,4) described the results in a cohort consisting of
subjects both of short and normal stature. The mean height of
the patients in the first paper was 170 cm. The upper limit of
the range of the height of the operated patients in all papers
was 174–176 cm (2–4). The total number of patients who
underwent cosmetic leg lengthening was 215 (2–4). The mean
age of the patients ranged from 25 to 27 years (2–4). The ring
fixator type device was used for complete leg lengthening in
two of the studies (3,4), while the Ilizarov device was replaced
by the intramedullary nail in all subjects in one study (2). The
mean height gained by lengthening of the leg ranged from
6.9 cm to 7.6 cm. The outcome reported was excellent to good
in 95%–100% patients (3, 4). Ninety-four percent to 99.2% of
patients were satisfied with the final outcome of the procedure
(2–4). Ninety-six percent to 99.2% of patients were willing to
undergo surgical leg lengthening again, despite the problems
and obstacles involved, and were willing to recommend the
intervention to other patients who had a subjective feeling
that they were short (3,4). The incidence of re-surgery after
the index procedure ranged from 12.5% to 28% (2–4). As
the results of leg lengthening using the Ilizarov device have
been described in the case of individuals of normal and short
stature, this surgical procedure cannot be dubbed an “unusual
experimental surgery”.
Principles of ethics
“Bio-ethics” refers to written and unwritten rules that medical
professionals are expected to follow in accordance with
professional standards considered appropriate by their
peers in the same profession. Ethics is an integral part of the
surgeon’s career, and every decision that surgeons make
should take into account the clinical factors, non-clinical
factors, ethical factors and rules laid out in the code of
conduct published by the Medical Council of India. The four
principles of ethics are respect for the autonomy of the patient,
beneficence, non-maleficence and justice (5).
Respect for autonomy implies giving due consideration to
the patient’s decision. As mature adults, patients can make
their own decisions without being put under pressure by the
doctor. Informed consent is obtained from patients after the
risks and benefits of the procedures they are advised undergo
have been explained to them completely. Choices, if available,
are also explained to the patient, who then makes the choice.
In a skeletally mature adult, the non-operative choice would
be to have a shoe raise fitted. Doctors must take the wishes
of the patient seriously. If the patient requests the doctor not
to inform their parents about their condition and the plan of
treatment, the doctor must respect the patient’s confidentiality
and is bound not to disclose these, unless this would cause
a serious health problem for the public in general. Thus, if a
patient of normal stature requests a height gain surgery, the
doctor cannot ethically deny this. Denying the request would
mean violating the patient’s right to autonomy.
Beneficence means acting in the patient’s best interest.
The doctor should be able to benefit the patient through a
surgical intervention. The surgical procedure should be shown
to have benefited other patients who have undergone it.
Clinical studies have shown that cosmetic limb lengthening
surgery not only increases the height of all patients (2–4), but
also improves the person’s self-esteem (3). Denying height
gain surgery to a patient who has reasonable justification for
opting for the procedure would mean violating the principle of
beneficence.
Non-maleficence means refraining from doing any harm to
the patient. All surgical procedures are associated with some
complications; however, the benefit of the intervention must
be greater than the risk involved. The surgeon should not
cause any harm to the patient intentionally or unintentionally.
There should not be any malafide intentions in undertaking
the surgical procedure. The incidence of complications of limb
lengthening surgery has been reported to range from 37% to
72% (3, 4). However, most of these problems are related to soft
tissue and bony parts and are of a relatively mild nature, not
causing any permanent disability or handicap (3).
Justice involves the fair and appropriate allocation of resources,
depending on the need. Justice also means taking a decision
that would benefit not only the patient, but society as well
(5). According to the principle of justice, the surgeon must
exercise restraint as far as the type of surgical procedures
to be performed is concerned, depending on the resources
allotted. In the private healthcare system, patients pay for
healthcare and hence, are in a position to choose the type of
surgical procedure they wish to undergo. At present, there are
no laws stating that cosmetic limb lengthening should not be
undertaken in the country.
Hence, the decision to perform a surgery for height gain in
patients who subjectively feel that they are of short stature
is in accordance with the four basic principles of ethics. It can
be argued that denying this surgery to a patient who requests
it for a valid and reasonable cause would violate all four
principles.