[griffinheart]

This seems great, so why does the article state:

> It remains in use today for certain special cases but is considered controversial and some surgeons refuse to perform it.

I imagine there's a reason, but I hope its not "doesn't look good"

[kadoban]

That does indeed seem to be the reason. As the article states it: "[T]he Krukenberg procedure's poor cosmesis makes it very rare [...]"

I'm sure self-image is a complicated consideration when someone is dealing with an amputation, I can't imagine trying to assess what the right choice for another person would be in that kind of situation. But surgeons straight out refusing to perform it seems extreme, based on the limited information provided in the article.

[pjlegato]

Making that assessment is a part of the surgeon's job.

Perhaps they realized at some point that many patients are enthusiastic for the procedure before it's done, but most grow to hate it afterwards -- and blame the surgeon for having done the procedure to them.

Any given patient will have had zero prior experience with complex physiological and psychological post-operative outcomes, whereas surgeons do (individually or collectively.) It seems fitting that they should share that, and discourage patients from having procedures if outcomes are mainly bad.

[tomatotomato37]

I doubt this is that good for the joints in the elbow, as the two bones normally hinge in parallel. Patient self-image seems to be the main reason though.

[blauditore]

I imagine the reason is side effects, like additional long-term pain for the patient, compared to having to just a stump. As far as I know, those things are hard to predict (and mitigate if present).

But I'm by no means an expert, that's just a semi-educated guess.