Correlation Between Anteversion and neck-Shaft Femoral Angles, For Designing Of Hip Prostheses
Correlation Between Anteversion and neck-Shaft Femoral Angles,For Designing Of Hip Prostheses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70284/njirm.v7i5.1132Keywords:
Anteversion angle, Neck-Shaft angle, FemurAbstract
Background& Objective: Femoral neck anteversion angle (FNA) and neck-shaft angle (NSA) or inclination angle are important anatomic indicators in clinical orthopedics. Main aim of this study, is to determine correlation between FNA and NSA to prediction one of these parameters from other to designing of hip prostheses .Methods: Each femur was placed with the posterior surface of its condyles and greater trochanter touching a smooth horizontal surface (Kingsley and Olmsted method). For measurement of anteversion angle, Retrocondylar axis andfemoral neck axis were made with digital photography and with Digimizer software. For measurement of inclination angle, femoral neck axis and Diaphyseal axis were made with same manner. Results: 159 dried femora were studied. Average anteversion angle in degree for male was 12.17° (±6.83°) and in female was 15.14° (±9.17°). According to this study, in left male femur, for one degree increase in NSA, FNA grows 0.38°; in right male femur, for one degree increase in NSA, FNA grows 0.74°; in right female femur, for on degree increase in NSA, FNA grows 1.55°.Interpretation& Conclusion:In this research, we found that there is a meaningfulpositive relationship between FNA and NSA, to prediction on of them from the other. This relationship is seen in male femur (right and left) and Female femur (just right). [Ehsangolchini NJIRM 2016; 7(5): 25-32]
References
1.Ravichandran D, Muthukumaravel N, Jaikumar R, Das H, Rajendran M. Proximal Femoral Geometry in Indians and its Clinical Applications. Journal of Anatomical Society of India. 2011;60(1):6-12.
2.Jiang N, Peng L, Al-Qwbani M, Xie G-P, Yang Q-M, Chai Y, et al. Femoral Version, Neck-Shaft Angle, and Acetabular Anteversion in Chinese Han Population: A Retrospective Analysis of 466 Healthy Adults. Medicine. 2015;94(21):e891.
3.Khan WU, Iqbal MJ, Marwat M, Ilahi M. FEMORAL NECK ANTEVERSION: IS THE SIDE WISE DIFFERENCE SIGNIFICANT? Gomal Journal of Medical Sciences. 2014;11(2).
4.Zalawadia A, Ruparelia S, Shah S, Parekh D, Patel S, Rathod S, et al. Study of femoral neck anteversion of adult dry femora in Gujarat region. NJIRM. 2010;1(3):7-11.
5.Tayton E. Femoral anteversion A NECESSARY ANGLE OR AN EVOLUTIONARY VESTIGE? Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume. 2007;89(10):1283-8.
6.Otsianyi W, Naipanoi A, Koech A. The femoral collodiaphyseal angle amongst selected Kenyan ethic groups. J Morphol Sci. 2011;28:129-31.
7.Purcell MW. Sex Differences in the Femur and Acetabulum: Biomechanical Analysis with Forensic Significance 2013.
8.Teo PC, Kassim AYM, Thevarajan K. A 45-degree radiographic method for measuring the neck shaft angle and anteversion of the femur: a pilot study. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery. 2013;21(3).
9.Liodakis E, Kenawey M, Petri M, Zümrüt A, Hawi N, Krettek C, et al. Factors influencing neck anteversion during femoral nailing: a retrospective analysis of 220 torsion-difference CTs. Injury. 2011;42(11):1342-5. 10.Wright SJ, Boymans TA, Grimm B, Miles AW, Kessler O. Strong correlation between the morphology of the proximal femur and the geometry of the distal femoral trochlea. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2014;22(12):2900-10.
11.Rawal B, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian journal of orthopaedics. 2012;46(1):46.
12.Koerner JD, Patel NM, Yoon RS, Sirkin MS, Reilly MC, Liporace FA. Femoral Version of the General Population: Does “Normal†Vary by Gender or Ethnicity? Journal of orthopaedic trauma. 2013;27(6):308-11. 13.Reikeras O, Høiseth A, Regstad A, Fönstelien E. Femoral neck angles: a specimen study with special regard to bilateral differences. Acta Orthopaedica. 1982;53(5):775-9.
14.Maruyama M, Feinberg JR, Capello WN, D'Antonio JA. Morphologic Features of the Acetabulum and Femur: Anteversion Angle and Implant Positioning. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2001;393:52-65. 15.Umebese P, Adeyekun A, Moin M. Radiological assessment of femoral neck-shaft and anteversion angles in adult Nigerian HIPS. The Nigerian postgraduate medical journal. 2005;12(2):106-9.
16.Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neckâ€shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. Journal of anatomy. 2013;223(2):133-51.
17.Amith R. Analysis of the anteversion and neck shaft angle in dry femora of south indian origin. 2012. 18.Siwach R, Dahiya S. Anthropometric study of proximal femur geometry and its clinical application. Indian journal of Orthopaedics. 2003;37(4):247. 1
9.Zalawadia A, Ruparelia S, Shah S, Parekh D, Patel S, Rathod S, et al. Study of femoral neck anteversion of adult dry femora in gujarat region. Natl J Integr Res Med. 2010;1(3):7-11.
20.Kingsley PC, Olmsted K. A study to determine the angle of anteversion of the neck of the femur. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 1948;30(3):745-51.
21.Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2009;467(4):876-85.
22.Botser IB, Ozoude GC, Martin DE, Siddiqi AJ, Kuppuswami S, Domb BG. Femoral anteversion in the hip: comparison of measurement by computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and physical examination. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2012;28(5):619-27.
23.Bargar WL, Jamali AA, Nejad AH. Femoral anteversion in THA and its lack of correlation with native acetabular anteversion. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®. 2010;468(2):527-32.
24.Husmann O, Rubin PJ, Leyvraz P-F, de Roguin B, Argenson J-N. Three-dimensional morphology of the proximal femur. The Journal of arthroplasty. 1997;12(4):444-50.
25.Bråten M, Terjesen T, Rossvoll I. Femoral anteversion in normal adults: ultrasound measurements in 50 men and 50 women. Acta Orthopaedica. 1992;63(1):29-32.
26.Khang G, Choi K, Kim C-S, Yang JS, Bae T-S. A study of Korean femoral geometry. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2003;406(1):116-22.
27.Yun HH, Yoon JR, Yang J-H, Song SY, Park SB, Lee JW. A validation study for estimation of femoral anteversion using the posterior lesser trochanter line: an analysis of computed tomography measurement. The Journal of arthroplasty. 2013;28(10):1776-80.
28.Mahaisavariya B, Sitthiseripratip K, Tongdee T, Bohez EL, Vander Sloten J, Oris P. Morphological study of the proximal femur: a new method of geometrical assessment using 3-dimensional reverse engineering. Medical engineering & physics. 2002;24(9):617-2
29.Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. Journal of computer assisted tomography. 1998;22(4):610-4.
30.Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK, Song EK, Yoon TR. 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC® system. Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing. 2006;44(10):895-906.
31.Noble PC, ALEXANDER JW, LINDAHL LJ, YEW DT, GRANBERRY WM, TULLOS HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1988;235:148-65. 32.Rubin P, Leyvraz P, Aubaniac J, Argenson J, Esteve P, De Roguin B. The morphology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radiographic analysis. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume. 1992;74(1):28-
32.
33.Roy S, Kundu R, Medda S, Gupta A, Nanrah BK. Evaluation of proximal femoral geometry in plainanterior-posterior radiograph in eastern-Indian population. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2014;8(9):AC01.
34.Hoaglund F, WENC DJIN L. Anatomy of the femoral neck and head, with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1980;152:10-6.
2.Jiang N, Peng L, Al-Qwbani M, Xie G-P, Yang Q-M, Chai Y, et al. Femoral Version, Neck-Shaft Angle, and Acetabular Anteversion in Chinese Han Population: A Retrospective Analysis of 466 Healthy Adults. Medicine. 2015;94(21):e891.
3.Khan WU, Iqbal MJ, Marwat M, Ilahi M. FEMORAL NECK ANTEVERSION: IS THE SIDE WISE DIFFERENCE SIGNIFICANT? Gomal Journal of Medical Sciences. 2014;11(2).
4.Zalawadia A, Ruparelia S, Shah S, Parekh D, Patel S, Rathod S, et al. Study of femoral neck anteversion of adult dry femora in Gujarat region. NJIRM. 2010;1(3):7-11.
5.Tayton E. Femoral anteversion A NECESSARY ANGLE OR AN EVOLUTIONARY VESTIGE? Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume. 2007;89(10):1283-8.
6.Otsianyi W, Naipanoi A, Koech A. The femoral collodiaphyseal angle amongst selected Kenyan ethic groups. J Morphol Sci. 2011;28:129-31.
7.Purcell MW. Sex Differences in the Femur and Acetabulum: Biomechanical Analysis with Forensic Significance 2013.
8.Teo PC, Kassim AYM, Thevarajan K. A 45-degree radiographic method for measuring the neck shaft angle and anteversion of the femur: a pilot study. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery. 2013;21(3).
9.Liodakis E, Kenawey M, Petri M, Zümrüt A, Hawi N, Krettek C, et al. Factors influencing neck anteversion during femoral nailing: a retrospective analysis of 220 torsion-difference CTs. Injury. 2011;42(11):1342-5. 10.Wright SJ, Boymans TA, Grimm B, Miles AW, Kessler O. Strong correlation between the morphology of the proximal femur and the geometry of the distal femoral trochlea. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2014;22(12):2900-10.
11.Rawal B, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian journal of orthopaedics. 2012;46(1):46.
12.Koerner JD, Patel NM, Yoon RS, Sirkin MS, Reilly MC, Liporace FA. Femoral Version of the General Population: Does “Normal†Vary by Gender or Ethnicity? Journal of orthopaedic trauma. 2013;27(6):308-11. 13.Reikeras O, Høiseth A, Regstad A, Fönstelien E. Femoral neck angles: a specimen study with special regard to bilateral differences. Acta Orthopaedica. 1982;53(5):775-9.
14.Maruyama M, Feinberg JR, Capello WN, D'Antonio JA. Morphologic Features of the Acetabulum and Femur: Anteversion Angle and Implant Positioning. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. 2001;393:52-65. 15.Umebese P, Adeyekun A, Moin M. Radiological assessment of femoral neck-shaft and anteversion angles in adult Nigerian HIPS. The Nigerian postgraduate medical journal. 2005;12(2):106-9.
16.Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neckâ€shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. Journal of anatomy. 2013;223(2):133-51.
17.Amith R. Analysis of the anteversion and neck shaft angle in dry femora of south indian origin. 2012. 18.Siwach R, Dahiya S. Anthropometric study of proximal femur geometry and its clinical application. Indian journal of Orthopaedics. 2003;37(4):247. 1
9.Zalawadia A, Ruparelia S, Shah S, Parekh D, Patel S, Rathod S, et al. Study of femoral neck anteversion of adult dry femora in gujarat region. Natl J Integr Res Med. 2010;1(3):7-11.
20.Kingsley PC, Olmsted K. A study to determine the angle of anteversion of the neck of the femur. The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery. 1948;30(3):745-51.
21.Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2009;467(4):876-85.
22.Botser IB, Ozoude GC, Martin DE, Siddiqi AJ, Kuppuswami S, Domb BG. Femoral anteversion in the hip: comparison of measurement by computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and physical examination. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2012;28(5):619-27.
23.Bargar WL, Jamali AA, Nejad AH. Femoral anteversion in THA and its lack of correlation with native acetabular anteversion. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®. 2010;468(2):527-32.
24.Husmann O, Rubin PJ, Leyvraz P-F, de Roguin B, Argenson J-N. Three-dimensional morphology of the proximal femur. The Journal of arthroplasty. 1997;12(4):444-50.
25.Bråten M, Terjesen T, Rossvoll I. Femoral anteversion in normal adults: ultrasound measurements in 50 men and 50 women. Acta Orthopaedica. 1992;63(1):29-32.
26.Khang G, Choi K, Kim C-S, Yang JS, Bae T-S. A study of Korean femoral geometry. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2003;406(1):116-22.
27.Yun HH, Yoon JR, Yang J-H, Song SY, Park SB, Lee JW. A validation study for estimation of femoral anteversion using the posterior lesser trochanter line: an analysis of computed tomography measurement. The Journal of arthroplasty. 2013;28(10):1776-80.
28.Mahaisavariya B, Sitthiseripratip K, Tongdee T, Bohez EL, Vander Sloten J, Oris P. Morphological study of the proximal femur: a new method of geometrical assessment using 3-dimensional reverse engineering. Medical engineering & physics. 2002;24(9):617-2
29.Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. Journal of computer assisted tomography. 1998;22(4):610-4.
30.Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK, Song EK, Yoon TR. 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC® system. Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing. 2006;44(10):895-906.
31.Noble PC, ALEXANDER JW, LINDAHL LJ, YEW DT, GRANBERRY WM, TULLOS HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1988;235:148-65. 32.Rubin P, Leyvraz P, Aubaniac J, Argenson J, Esteve P, De Roguin B. The morphology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radiographic analysis. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery, British Volume. 1992;74(1):28-
32.
33.Roy S, Kundu R, Medda S, Gupta A, Nanrah BK. Evaluation of proximal femoral geometry in plainanterior-posterior radiograph in eastern-Indian population. Journal of clinical and diagnostic research: JCDR. 2014;8(9):AC01.
34.Hoaglund F, WENC DJIN L. Anatomy of the femoral neck and head, with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1980;152:10-6.
Downloads
Published
2018-01-24
How to Cite
Golchini, E., Aeezangi, B., Barbarestani, M., Khtari, T., & Pakzad, R. (2018). Correlation Between Anteversion and neck-Shaft Femoral Angles, For Designing Of Hip Prostheses: Correlation Between Anteversion and neck-Shaft Femoral Angles,For Designing Of Hip Prostheses. National Journal of Integrated Research in Medicine, 7(5), 25–32. https://doi.org/10.70284/njirm.v7i5.1132
Issue
Section
Original Articles
