Search

This is a retrospective chart and radiographic review of 145 patients who underwent full‐body EOS imaging; 109 males and 36 females. The mean ages of the female and male subsets are 28.8 (SD = 11.6) years and 29.5 (SD = 11.8) years, respectively. The sum of the foot height (Ft) and the tibial length (T) for each subject was compared to their femur length (Fe). Subsequently, the sum of the tibial (T) and femoral lengths (Fe) were compared to their respective upper body lengths (UB), as measured from the tops of the femoral heads. A linear regression test was performed to determine whether a Lucas sequence‐based relationship exists between Ft + T and Fe, and between T + Fe and UB. The regression for the relationship between Ft + T and Fe for the entire cohort (R = 0.82, R2 = 0.70), the female subset (R = 0.94, R2 = 0.88) and the male subset (R = 0.75, R2 = 0.57), all demonstrated a strong positive correlation between Ft + T and Fe and showed that Ft + T is a likely predictor of Fe. The regression test for the entire cohort demonstrated a moderately positive correlation between T + Fe and UB (R = 0.41, R2 = 0.17, F(1, 145) = 29.42, p = 2.4E‐07). A stronger correlation was found for the relationship between T + Fe and UB (R = 0.57, R2 = 0.32, F(1, 35) = 16.64, p = 2.5E‐05) for the female subset relative to the male subset (R = 0.20, R2 = 0.038, F(1, 35) = 4.37, p = 0.04). There appears to be a Lucas sequence relationship between the lengths of the foot height, tibial length, femoral length and upper body length, which together make up standing height. This mathematical proportion relationship is stronger in females than males. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: To promote a discussion on the ethics and justifications of stature lengthening in patients without skeletal deformity., Background: Stature lengthening for height gain in patients without skeletal deformity has stirred controversy within the orthopedic community. However, current literature does not delineate the ethical issues surrounding this procedure. Improvements in the techniques, technology, and safety profile of stature lengthening warrant an ethical discussion to challenge, justify, and guide the use of this surgical procedure., Review Results: Examination of ethical issues leads to the distinction between the dual roles of stature lengthening as a treatment vs an enhancement . The primary focus on stature lengthening as treatment allows for exploration of "height dysphoria"-a psychological burden caused by a dissatisfaction with one's height-as the primary pathology that may justify surgical intervention., Conclusion: In our opinion, additional work is required to establish "height dysphoria" as a true pathology in order to ethically justify stature lengthening as a legitimate form of treatment. Further discussion is needed to address the ethics of stature lengthening as an enhancement., Clinical Significance: This paper addresses salient ethical issues of stature lengthening in patients without skeletal deformity by exploring historical, contemporary, and comparative contexts., How to Cite This Article: Lee RC, Aulisio M, Liu RW. Exploring the Ethics of Stature Lengthening as Treatment for Height Dysphoria. Strategies Trauma Limb Reconstr 2020;15(3):163-168., Competing Interests: Source of support: Nil Conflict of interest: None, (Copyright © 2020; Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) Ltd.)