I am confused on who to goto for a faster yet safer recovery for 7.5cms on tibias.
Peng is definitely faster because of LATN and safer in the sense no ATL(his device is great). Only worried about permanent knee pain.
Catagni coz hes like the God for tibias. But external would require to do 9 to hit 7.5 after shrinkge. And obviously greater recovery time.
Anyone heard of permanent knee pain from pengs patients after nail removal?
please help me decide.
not bothered about place and travel. I fear of ATL that catagni would do after 5cm. So device is the drawback from catagni.
if u cud afford both i'd do peng. I've heard how much catagni frames you have to turn twice the amount you want because of the inaccuracy which to me is BS it's 2017 he needs to get updated frames like everyone else.
Quote from: 0184946 on March 12, 2017, 09:06:38 PMif u cud afford both i'd do peng. I've heard how much catagni frames you have to turn twice the amount you want because of the inaccuracy which to me is BS it's 2017 he needs to get updated frames like everyone else.
Catagni is as updated as it gets. With his device(HEF), aside from the other benefits, you actually 'lose' less than you would with any other external device. He is however very realistic and will let you know that it's possible to gain around 1-1.5 cm less than what you turn. I myself turned 6.4cm and had an actual gain of 6cm.
Aside from that, he constantly has a stream of doctors from all over the world (including Paley at one point) coming to study under him.
Quote from: Whereintheworld? on March 12, 2017, 09:28:07 PMCatagni is as updated as it gets. With his device(HEF), aside from the other benefits, you actually 'lose' less than you would with any other external device. He is however very realistic and will let you know that it's possible to gain around 1-1.5 cm less than what you turn. I myself turned 6.4cm and had an actual gain of 6cm.
Aside from that, he constantly has a stream of doctors from all over the world (including Paley at one point) coming to study under him.
I doubt there is concrete evidence that in his device you lose less than u would with any other ext device. Probably said that to market himself more. However, i find it interesting that Docs have been under his guidance any documents on that?
Quote from: 0184946 on March 12, 2017, 09:38:07 PMI doubt there is concrete evidence that in his device you lose less than u would with any other ext device. Probably said that to market himself more. However, i find it interesting that Docs have been under his guidance any documents on that?
Just read Catagni's CV. He is a god with Ilizarov in the west basically teaching all western docs how to do it. Actually, read any western doc CV and see they went to Lecco to study how to use the Ilizarov.
Quote from: TIBIKE200 on March 12, 2017, 09:40:07 PM Just read Catagni's CV. He is a god with Ilizarov in the west basically teaching all western docs how to do it. Actually, read any western doc CV and see they went to Lecco to study how to use the Ilizarov.
Will do. I think i remember reading on Paley's CV that he studied LL in Italy in like '86? Never thought of a connection between him and catagni perhaps his met Pili too
Quote from: 0184946 on March 12, 2017, 09:46:27 PMWill do. I think i remember reading on Paley's CV that he studied LL in Italy in like '86? Never thought of a connection between him and catagni perhaps his met Pili too
For the record, Pili/Catagni never told me that with their device you 'lose' less, that was simply my conclusion after comparing my results (.4 loss) with the diaries of patients who went elsewhere (usually 1.5cm+).
-I admit I'm biased in their favor, which is one of the reasons I stopped myself from posting until now.
you do not lose cm after lengthening. The people who think they turned enough for x cm seem not to realize that the odds are basically zero that every turn was equal and exactly .25 mm
You must be logged in to post a reply.