Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Radiology 12/2023

23-09-2023 | Computed Tomography | Original Article

Virtual 3D femur model to assess femoral version: comparison to the 2D axial slice approach

Authors: Jade Iwasaka-Neder, Sarah D Bixby, M Alejandra Bedoya, Enju Liu, Delma Y Jarrett, Donna Agahigian, Andy Tsai

Published in: Pediatric Radiology | Issue 12/2023

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Quantifying femoral version is crucial in diagnosing femoral version abnormalities and for accurate pre-surgical planning. There are numerous methods for measuring femoral version, however, reliability studies for most of these methods excluded children with hip deformities.

Objective

To propose a method of measuring femoral version based on a virtual 3D femur model, and systematically compare its reliability to the widely used Murphy’s 2D axial slice technique.

Materials and methods

We searched our imaging database to identify hip/femur CTs performed on children (<18 years old) with a clinical indication of femoral version measurement (September 2021—August 2022). Exclusion criteria were prior hip surgery, and inadequate image quality or field-of-view. Two blinded radiologists independently measured femoral version using the virtual 3D femur model and Murphy’s 2D axial slice method. To assess intrareader variability, we randomly selected 20% of the study sample for re-measurements by the two radiologists >2 weeks later. We analyzed the reliability and correlation of these techniques via intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman analysis, and deformity subgroup analysis.

Results

Our study sample consisted of 142 femurs from 71 patients (10.6±4.4 years, male=31). Intra- and inter-reader correlations for both techniques were excellent (ICC≥0.91). However, Bland-Altman analysis revealed that the standard deviation (SD) of the absolute difference between the two radiologists for the Murphy method (mean 13.7°) was larger than that of the 3D femur model technique (mean 4.8°), indicating higher reader variability. In femurs with hip flexion deformity, the SD of the absolute difference for the Murphy technique was 17°, compared to 6.5° for the 3D femur model technique. In femurs with apparent coxa valga deformity, the SD of the absolute difference for the Murphy technique was 10.4°, compared to 5.2° for the 3D femur model technique.

Conclusion

The 3D femur model technique is more reliable than the Murphy's 2D axial slice technique in measuring femoral version, especially in children with hip flexion and apparent coxa valga deformities.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Murphy SB, Simon SR, Kijewski PK et al (1987) Femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:1169–1176PubMedCrossRef Murphy SB, Simon SR, Kijewski PK et al (1987) Femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69:1169–1176PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference Reikerås O, Bjerkreim I, Sortland O (1983) Fluoroscopy in measurement of femoral neck anteversion. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 24:81–83PubMedCrossRef Reikerås O, Bjerkreim I, Sortland O (1983) Fluoroscopy in measurement of femoral neck anteversion. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 24:81–83PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Sankar WN, Novais E, Koueiter D et al (2018) Analysis of femoral version in patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 26:545–551PubMedCrossRef Sankar WN, Novais E, Koueiter D et al (2018) Analysis of femoral version in patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 26:545–551PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Fabricant PD, Fields KG, Taylor SA et al (2015) The effect of femoral and acetabular version on clinical outcomes after arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:537–543PubMedCrossRef Fabricant PD, Fields KG, Taylor SA et al (2015) The effect of femoral and acetabular version on clinical outcomes after arthroscopic femoroacetabular impingement surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:537–543PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Mastel MS, El-Bakoury A, Parkar A et al (2020) Outcomes of femoral de-rotation osteotomy for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement in adults with decreased femoral anteversion. J Hip Preserv Surg 7:755–763PubMedCrossRef Mastel MS, El-Bakoury A, Parkar A et al (2020) Outcomes of femoral de-rotation osteotomy for treatment of femoroacetabular impingement in adults with decreased femoral anteversion. J Hip Preserv Surg 7:755–763PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Lerch TD, Antioco T, Meier MK et al (2022) Combined abnormalities of femoral version and acetabular version and McKibbin Index in FAI patients evaluated for hip preservation surgery. J Hip Preserv Surg 9:67–77PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Lerch TD, Antioco T, Meier MK et al (2022) Combined abnormalities of femoral version and acetabular version and McKibbin Index in FAI patients evaluated for hip preservation surgery. J Hip Preserv Surg 9:67–77PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA (2012) Femoral antetorsion: comparing asymptomatic volunteers and patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology 263:475–483PubMedCrossRef Sutter R, Dietrich TJ, Zingg PO, Pfirrmann CWA (2012) Femoral antetorsion: comparing asymptomatic volunteers and patients with femoroacetabular impingement. Radiology 263:475–483PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Schaver AL, Oshodi A, Glass NA et al (2022) Cam morphology is associated with increased femoral version: Findings from a collection of 1,321 cadaveric femurs. Arthroscopy 38:831–836PubMedCrossRef Schaver AL, Oshodi A, Glass NA et al (2022) Cam morphology is associated with increased femoral version: Findings from a collection of 1,321 cadaveric femurs. Arthroscopy 38:831–836PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Davids JR, Marshall AD, Blocker ER et al (2003) Femoral anteversion in children with cerebral palsy. Assessment with two and three-dimensional computed tomography scans. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:481–488PubMedCrossRef Davids JR, Marshall AD, Blocker ER et al (2003) Femoral anteversion in children with cerebral palsy. Assessment with two and three-dimensional computed tomography scans. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:481–488PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Abel MF, Sutherland DH, Wenger DR, Mubarak SJ (1994) Evaluation of CT scans and 3-D reformatted images for quantitative assessment of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop 14:48–53PubMedCrossRef Abel MF, Sutherland DH, Wenger DR, Mubarak SJ (1994) Evaluation of CT scans and 3-D reformatted images for quantitative assessment of the hip. J Pediatr Orthop 14:48–53PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E (1998) A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. J Comput Assist Tomogr 22:610–614PubMedCrossRef Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E (1998) A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. J Comput Assist Tomogr 22:610–614PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Tomczak RJ, Guenther KP, Rieber A et al (1997) MR imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle as a new technique: comparison with CT in children and adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:791–794PubMedCrossRef Tomczak RJ, Guenther KP, Rieber A et al (1997) MR imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle as a new technique: comparison with CT in children and adults. AJR Am J Roentgenol 168:791–794PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Takeuchi S, Goto H, Iguchi H et al (2019) Ultrasonographic assessment of femoral torsion angle based on tilting angles of femoral neck and condylar axis. Ultrasound Med Biol 45:1970–1976PubMedCrossRef Takeuchi S, Goto H, Iguchi H et al (2019) Ultrasonographic assessment of femoral torsion angle based on tilting angles of femoral neck and condylar axis. Ultrasound Med Biol 45:1970–1976PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Kuo TY, Skedros JG, Bloebaum RD (2003) Measurement of femoral anteversion by biplane radiography and computed tomography imaging: comparison with an anatomic reference. Invest Radiol 38:221–229PubMedCrossRef Kuo TY, Skedros JG, Bloebaum RD (2003) Measurement of femoral anteversion by biplane radiography and computed tomography imaging: comparison with an anatomic reference. Invest Radiol 38:221–229PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Schmaranzer F, Kallini JR, Miller PE et al (2020) The effect of modality and landmark selection on MRI and CT femoral torsion angles. Radiology 296:381–390PubMedCrossRef Schmaranzer F, Kallini JR, Miller PE et al (2020) The effect of modality and landmark selection on MRI and CT femoral torsion angles. Radiology 296:381–390PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Jarrett DY, Oliveira AM, Zou KH et al (2010) Axial oblique CT to assess femoral anteversion. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1230–1233PubMedCrossRef Jarrett DY, Oliveira AM, Zou KH et al (2010) Axial oblique CT to assess femoral anteversion. AJR Am J Roentgenol 194:1230–1233PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Hermann KL, Egund N (1997) CT Measurement of Anteversion in the Femoral Neck. Acta Radiol 38:527–532PubMed Hermann KL, Egund N (1997) CT Measurement of Anteversion in the Femoral Neck. Acta Radiol 38:527–532PubMed
19.
go back to reference Schmaranzer F, Lerch TD, Siebenrock KA et al (2019) Differences in femoral torsion among various measurement methods increase in hips with excessive femoral torsion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 477:1073–1083PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Schmaranzer F, Lerch TD, Siebenrock KA et al (2019) Differences in femoral torsion among various measurement methods increase in hips with excessive femoral torsion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 477:1073–1083PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Kaiser P, Attal R, Kammerer M et al (2016) Significant differences in femoral torsion values depending on the CT measurement technique. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:1259–1264PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Kaiser P, Attal R, Kammerer M et al (2016) Significant differences in femoral torsion values depending on the CT measurement technique. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136:1259–1264PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Lerch TD, Kaim T, Hanke MS et al (2023) Assessment of femoral retroversion on preoperative hip magnetic resonance imaging in patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis: Theoretical implications for hip impingement risk estimation. J Child Orthop 17:116–125PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Lerch TD, Kaim T, Hanke MS et al (2023) Assessment of femoral retroversion on preoperative hip magnetic resonance imaging in patients with slipped capital femoral epiphysis: Theoretical implications for hip impingement risk estimation. J Child Orthop 17:116–125PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Zurmühle CA, Kuner V, McInnes J et al (2021) The crescent sign-a predictor of hip instability in magnetic resonance arthrography. J Hip Preserv Surg 8:164–171PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Zurmühle CA, Kuner V, McInnes J et al (2021) The crescent sign-a predictor of hip instability in magnetic resonance arthrography. J Hip Preserv Surg 8:164–171PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
27.
go back to reference Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK et al (2007) 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC® system. Med Biol Eng Comput 45:325–325CrossRef Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK et al (2007) 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC® system. Med Biol Eng Comput 45:325–325CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Brooks JT, Bomar JD, Jeffords ME et al (2021) Defining a new three-dimensional method for determining femoral torsional pathology in children. J Pediatr Orthop B 30:331–336PubMedCrossRef Brooks JT, Bomar JD, Jeffords ME et al (2021) Defining a new three-dimensional method for determining femoral torsional pathology in children. J Pediatr Orthop B 30:331–336PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Reikerås O, Bjerkreim I, Kolbenstvedt A (1983) Anteversion of the acetabulum and femoral neck in normals and in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. Acta Orthop Scand 54:18–23PubMedCrossRef Reikerås O, Bjerkreim I, Kolbenstvedt A (1983) Anteversion of the acetabulum and femoral neck in normals and in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. Acta Orthop Scand 54:18–23PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Gittings DJ, Dattilo JR, Fryhofer G et al (2017) Treatment of hip flexion contractures with psoas recession through the middle window of the ilioinguinal approach. JBJS Essent Surg Tech 7:e25PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Gittings DJ, Dattilo JR, Fryhofer G et al (2017) Treatment of hip flexion contractures with psoas recession through the middle window of the ilioinguinal approach. JBJS Essent Surg Tech 7:e25PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Pinero JR, Goldstein RY, Culver S et al (2012) Hip flexion contracture and diminished functional outcomes in cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 32:600–604PubMedCrossRef Pinero JR, Goldstein RY, Culver S et al (2012) Hip flexion contracture and diminished functional outcomes in cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop 32:600–604PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Tönnis D, Heinecke A (1999) Current concepts review - acetabular and femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1747–1770PubMedCrossRef Tönnis D, Heinecke A (1999) Current concepts review - acetabular and femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1747–1770PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Morvan J, Bouttier R, Mazieres B et al (2013) Relationship between hip dysplasia, pain, and osteoarthritis in a cohort of patients with hip symptoms. J Rheumatol 40:1583–1589PubMedCrossRef Morvan J, Bouttier R, Mazieres B et al (2013) Relationship between hip dysplasia, pain, and osteoarthritis in a cohort of patients with hip symptoms. J Rheumatol 40:1583–1589PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Dolan MM, Heyworth BE, Bedi A et al (2011) CT reveals a high incidence of osseous abnormalities in hips with labral tears. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:831–838PubMedCrossRef Dolan MM, Heyworth BE, Bedi A et al (2011) CT reveals a high incidence of osseous abnormalities in hips with labral tears. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:831–838PubMedCrossRef
35.
go back to reference Liu RW, Toogood P, Hart DE et al (2009) The effect of varus and valgus osteotomies on femoral version. J Pediatr Orthop 29:666–675PubMedCrossRef Liu RW, Toogood P, Hart DE et al (2009) The effect of varus and valgus osteotomies on femoral version. J Pediatr Orthop 29:666–675PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Morrell DS, Pearson JM, Sauser DD (2002) Progressive bone and joint abnormalities of the spine and lower extremities in cerebral palsy. Radiographics 22:257–268PubMedCrossRef Morrell DS, Pearson JM, Sauser DD (2002) Progressive bone and joint abnormalities of the spine and lower extremities in cerebral palsy. Radiographics 22:257–268PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Mathews SS, Jones MH, Sperling SC (1953) Hip derangements seen in cerebral palsied children. Am J Phys Med 32:213–221PubMedCrossRef Mathews SS, Jones MH, Sperling SC (1953) Hip derangements seen in cerebral palsied children. Am J Phys Med 32:213–221PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Sauser DD, Hewes RC, Root L (1986) Hip changes in spastic cerebral palsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 146:1219–1222PubMedCrossRef Sauser DD, Hewes RC, Root L (1986) Hip changes in spastic cerebral palsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 146:1219–1222PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Kay RM, Jaki KA, Skaggs DL (2000) The effect of femoral rotation on the projected femoral neck-shaft angle. J Pediatr Orthop 20:736–739PubMedCrossRef Kay RM, Jaki KA, Skaggs DL (2000) The effect of femoral rotation on the projected femoral neck-shaft angle. J Pediatr Orthop 20:736–739PubMedCrossRef
40.
go back to reference Boese CK, Jostmeier J, Oppermann J et al (2016) The neck shaft angle: CT reference values of 800 adult hips. Skeletal Radiol 45:455–463PubMedCrossRef Boese CK, Jostmeier J, Oppermann J et al (2016) The neck shaft angle: CT reference values of 800 adult hips. Skeletal Radiol 45:455–463PubMedCrossRef
41.
go back to reference Sullivan ES, Jones C, Miller SD et al (2022) Effect of positioning error on the Hilgenreiner epiphyseal angle and the head-shaft angle compared to the femoral neck-shaft angle in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop B 31:160–168PubMedCrossRef Sullivan ES, Jones C, Miller SD et al (2022) Effect of positioning error on the Hilgenreiner epiphyseal angle and the head-shaft angle compared to the femoral neck-shaft angle in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop B 31:160–168PubMedCrossRef
42.
go back to reference Sullivan ES, Jones C, Miller SD et al (2022) Effect of positioning error on the Hilgenreiner epiphyseal angle and the head-shaft angle compared to the femoral neck-shaft angle in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop B 31:160–168PubMedCrossRef Sullivan ES, Jones C, Miller SD et al (2022) Effect of positioning error on the Hilgenreiner epiphyseal angle and the head-shaft angle compared to the femoral neck-shaft angle in children with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Orthop B 31:160–168PubMedCrossRef
43.
44.
go back to reference Martin Bland J, Altman D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327:307–310CrossRef Martin Bland J, Altman D (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 327:307–310CrossRef
45.
46.
go back to reference Cicchetti DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 6:284–290CrossRef Cicchetti DV (1994) Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess 6:284–290CrossRef
47.
go back to reference Haghayegh S, Kang H-A, Khoshnevis S et al (2020) A comprehensive guideline for Bland-Altman and intra class correlation calculations to properly compare two methods of measurement and interpret findings. Physiol Meas 41:055012PubMedCrossRef Haghayegh S, Kang H-A, Khoshnevis S et al (2020) A comprehensive guideline for Bland-Altman and intra class correlation calculations to properly compare two methods of measurement and interpret findings. Physiol Meas 41:055012PubMedCrossRef
48.
go back to reference Anvari A, Halpern EF, Samir AE (2018) Essentials of statistical methods for assessing reliability and agreement in quantitative imaging. Acad Radiol 25:391–396PubMedCrossRef Anvari A, Halpern EF, Samir AE (2018) Essentials of statistical methods for assessing reliability and agreement in quantitative imaging. Acad Radiol 25:391–396PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Virtual 3D femur model to assess femoral version: comparison to the 2D axial slice approach
Authors
Jade Iwasaka-Neder
Sarah D Bixby
M Alejandra Bedoya
Enju Liu
Delma Y Jarrett
Donna Agahigian
Andy Tsai
Publication date
23-09-2023
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Pediatric Radiology / Issue 12/2023
Print ISSN: 0301-0449
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1998
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05758-8

Other articles of this Issue 12/2023

Pediatric Radiology 12/2023 Go to the issue

Hermes

Hermes