Top

Published in:

01-01-2016 | Review Article

The femoral neck-shaft angle on plain radiographs: a systematic review

Authors: Christoph Kolja Boese, Jens Dargel, Johannes Oppermann, Peer Eysel, Max Joseph Scheyerer, Jan Bredow, Philipp Lechler

Published in: Skeletal Radiology | Issue 1/2016

Abstract

Objective

The femoral neck-shaft angle (NSA) is an important measure for the assessment of the anatomy of the hip and planning of operations. Despite its common use, there remains disagreement concerning the method of measurement and the correction of hip rotation and femoral version of the projected NSA on conventional radiographs. We addressed the following questions: (1) What are the reported values for NSA in normal adult subjects and in osteoarthritis? (2) Is there a difference between non-corrected and rotation-corrected measurements? (3) Which methods are used for measuring the NSA on plain radiographs? (4) What could be learned from an analysis of the intra- and interobserver reliability?

Material and methods

A systematic literature search was performed including 26 publications reporting the measurement of the NSA on conventional radiographs.

Results

The mean NSA of healthy adults (5,089 hips) was 128.8° (98–180°) and 131.5° (115–155°) in patients with osteoarthritis (1230 hips). The mean NSA was 128.5° (127–130.5°) for the rotation-corrected and 129.5° (119.6–151°) for the non-corrected measurements.

Conclusion

Our data showed a high variance of the reported neck-shaft angles. Notably, we identified the inconsistency of the published methods of measurement as a central issue. The reported effect of rotation-correction cannot be reliably verified.

Wright D, Whyne C, Hardisty M, Kreder HJ, Lubovsky O. Functional and anatomic orientation of the femoral head. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(9):2583–9.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Ripamonti C, Lisi L, Avella M. Femoral neck shaft angle width is associated with hip-fracture risk in males but not independently of femoral neck bone density. Br J Radiol. 2014:20130358.

Walton NP, Wynn-Jones H, Ward MS, Wimhurst JA. Femoral neck-shaft angle in extra-capsular proximal femoral fracture fixation: does it make a TAD of difference? Injury. 2005;36(11):1361–4.CrossRefPubMed

Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E, Salama JK, Ochi T, Tullos HS. The morphology of the femur in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol. 1998;80(4):711–9.CrossRef

Mills HJ, Horne JG, Purdie GL. The relationship between proximal femoral anatomy and osteoarthrosis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;288:205–8.PubMed

Olsen M, Davis ET, Gallie PA, Waddell JP, Schemitsch EH. The reliability of radiographic assessment of femoral neck-shaft and implant angulation in hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Arthroplast. 2009;24(3):333–40.CrossRef

Argenson JN, Flecher X, Parratte S, Aubaniac JM. Anatomy of the dysplastic hip and consequences for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007;465:40–5.PubMed

Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(4):876–85.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;235:148–65.PubMed

10.

Lechler P, Frink M, Gulati A, Murray D, Renkawitz T, Bucking B, et al. The influence of hip rotation on femoral offset in plain radiographs. Acta Orthop. 2014;85(4):389–95.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

11.

Bachour F, Marchetti E, Bocquet D, Vasseur L, Migaud H, Girard J. Radiographic preoperative templating of extra-offset cemented THA implants: how reliable is it and how does it affect survival? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010;96(7):760–8.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Konig G. Radiography of the proximal end of femur for measurements of angles (author’s translation). Z Orthop Grenzgeb. 1977;115(3):310–20.

13.

Grunert S, Bruckl R, Rosemeyer B. Rippstein and Muller roentgenologic determination of the actual femoral neck-shaft and antetorsion angle, 1: correction of the conversion table and study of the effects of positioning errors. Radiologe. 1986;26(6):293–304.PubMed

14.

Bruckl R, Grunert S, Rosemeyer B. Roentgenologic determination of the actual femoral neck-shaft and antetorsion angle, 2: alternatives to the Rippstein and Muller procedure. Radiologe. 1986;26(6):305–9.PubMed

15.

Rippstein J. Determination of the antetorsion of the femur neck by means of two x-ray pictures. Z Orthop Grenzgeb. 1955;86(3):345–60.

16.

Tonnis D. Normal values of the hip joint for the evaluation of X-rays in children and adults. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976;119:39–47.PubMed

17.

Bagaria V, Deshpande S, Kuthe A, Rasalkar DD, Paunipagar BK, Madhugiri TS. Radiographic study of the hip joint to determine anthropometric parameters for Indian population. Eur J Radiol. 2012;81(2):312–6.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Chiu CK, Chan CY, Singh VA. Is the femoral neck geometry adequate for placement of the proximal femoral nail in the Malaysian population? A review of 100 cases. Med J Malaysia. 2009;64(1):22–6.PubMed

19.

Clark JM, Freeman MA, Witham D. The relationship of neck orientation to the shape of the proximal femur. J Arthroplast. 1987;2(2):99–109.CrossRef

20.

Doherty M, Courtney P, Doherty S, Jenkins W, Maciewicz RA, Muir K, et al. Nonspherical femoral head shape (pistol grip deformity), neck shaft angle, and risk of hip osteoarthritis: a case-control study. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(10):3172–82.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Fearon A, Stephens S, Cook J, Smith P, Neeman T, Cormick W, et al. The relationship of femoral neck shaft angle and adiposity to greater trochanteric pain syndrome in women: a case control morphology and anthropometric study. Br J Sports Med. 2012;46(12):888–92.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

22.

Hoaglund FT, Low WD. Anatomy of the femoral neck and head, with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;152:10–6.PubMed

23.

Lequesne M, Malghem J, Dion E. The normal hip joint space: variations in width, shape, and architecture on 223 pelvic radiographs. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(9):1145–51.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

24.

Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E, Simondi M, Lavaste F. The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stems: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur. J Arthroplast. 2000;15(1):93–101.CrossRef

25.

Miller F, Merlo M, Liang Y, Kupcha P, Jamison J, Harcke HT. Femoral version and neck shaft angle. J Pediatr Orthop. 1993;13(3):382–8.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Moore RJ, Fazzalari NL, Manthey BA, Vernon-Roberts B. The relationship between head-neck-shaft angle, calcar width, articular cartilage thickness and bone volume in arthrosis of the hip. Br J Rheumatol. 1994;33(5):432–6.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Nelitz M, Guenther KP, Gunkel S, Puhl W. Reliability of radiological measurements in the assessment of hip dysplasia in adults. Br J Radiol. 1999;72(856):331–4.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Pajarinen J, Lindahl J, Savolainen V, Michelsson O, Hirvensalo E. Femoral shaft medialisation and neck-shaft angle in unstable pertrochanteric femoral fractures. Int Orthop. 2004;28(6):347–53.PubMedCentralPubMed

29.

Reikeras O, Hoiseth A. Femoral neck angles in osteoarthritis of the hip. Acta Orthop Scand. 1982;53(5):781–4.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Reikeras O, Hoiseth A, Reigstad A. Evaluation of the Dunlap/Rippstein method for determination of femoral neck angles. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh). 1985;26(2):177–9.

31.

Reikeras O, Hoiseth A, Reigstad A, Fonstelien E. Femoral neck angles: a specimen study with special regard to bilateral differences. Acta Orthop Scand. 1982;53(5):775–9.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN, Esteve P, de Roguin B. The morphology of the proximal femur: a three-dimensional radiographic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br Vol. 1992;74(1):28–32.

33.

Terjesen T, Benum P, Anda S, Svenningsen S. Increased femoral anteversion and osteoarthritis of the hip joint. Acta Orthop Scand. 1982;53(4):571–5.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Ulusoy H, Bilgici A, Kuru O, Sarica N, Arslan S, Erkorkmaz U. A new value of proximal femur geometry to evaluate hip fracture risk: true moment arm. Hip Int: J Clin Exp Res Hip Pathol Therapy. 2008;18(2):101–7.

35.

Wilson JD, Eardley W, Odak S, Jennings A. To what degree is digital imaging reliable? Validation of femoral neck shaft angle measurement in the era of picture archiving and communication systems. Br J Radiol. 2011;84(1000):375–9.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

36.

Bouttier R, Morvan J, Mazieres B, Rat AC, Ziegler LE, Fardellone P, et al. Reproducibility of radiographic hip measurements in adults. Joint Bone Spine. 2013;80(1):52–6.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Mast NH, Impellizzeri F, Keller S, Leunig M. Reliability and agreement of measures used in radiographic evaluation of the adult hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(1):188–99.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

38.

Buecking B, Boese CK, Bergmeister VA, Frink M, Ruchholtz S, Lechler P. Functional implications of femoral offset following hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fracture. Int Orthop. 2015 Jul 2.

39.

Anderson JY, Trinkaus E. Patterns of sexual, bilateral and interpopulational variation in human femoral neck-shaft angles. J Anat. 1998;192(Pt 2):279–85.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

40.

Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neck-shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. J Anat. 2013;223(2):133–51.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

41.

Guenoun B, Zadegan F, Aim F, Hannouche D, Nizard R. Reliability of a new method for lower-extremity measurements based on stereoradiographic three-dimensional reconstruction. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012;98(5):506–13.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Schmitz MR, Bittersohl B, Zaps D, Bomar JD, Pennock AT, Hosalkar HS. Spectrum of radiographic femoroacetabular impingement morphology in adolescents and young adults: an EOS-based double-cohort study. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2013;95(13):e90.CrossRef

43.

Gnudi S, Sitta E, Pignotti E. Prediction of incident hip fracture by femoral neck bone mineral density and neck-shaft angle: a 5-year longitudinal study in post-menopausal females. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1016):e467–473.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

44.

Nelson DA, Beck TJ, Wu G, Lewis CE, Bassford T, Cauley JA, et al. Ethnic differences in femur geometry in the women’s health initiative observational study. Osteoporos Int. 2011;22(5):1377–88.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Elbuken F, Baykara M, Ozturk C. Standardisation of the neck-shaft angle and measurement of age-, gender- and BMI-related changes in the femoral neck using DXA. Singap Med J. 2012;53(9):587–90.

46.

Buller LT, Rosneck J, Monaco FM, Butler R, Smith T, Barsoum WK. Relationship between proximal femoral and acetabular alignment in normal hip joints using 3-dimensional computed tomography. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(2):367–75.CrossRefPubMed

47.

Husmann O, Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, de Roguin B, Argenson JN. Three-dimensional morphology of the proximal femur. J Arthroplast. 1997;12(4):444–50.CrossRef

48.

Chung CY, Lee KM, Park MS, Lee SH, Choi IH, Cho TJ. Validity and reliability of measuring femoral anteversion and neck-shaft angle in patients with cerebral palsy. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2010;92(5):1195–205.CrossRef

49.

Huppertz A, Radmer S, Wagner M, Roessler T, Hamm B, Sparmann M. Computed tomography for preoperative planning in total hip arthroplasty: what radiologists need to know. Skeletal Radiol. 2014.

50.

Konig G. A practical method for the determination of the angle of antetorsion and neck-shaft angle of the femur. Z Orthop Grenzgeb. 1972;110(1):76–82.

51.

Miller F, Liang Y, Merlo M, Harcke HT. Measuring anteversion and femoral neck-shaft angle in cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1997;39(2):113–8.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Weber M, Lechler P, von Kunow F, Vollner F, Keshmiri A, Hapfelmeier A, et al. The validity of a novel radiological method for measuring femoral stem version on anteroposterior radiographs of the hip after total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B(3):306–11.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Boese CK, Buecking B, Schwarting T, Debus F, Ruchholtz S, Bliemel C, et al. The influence of pre-existing radiographic osteoarthritis on functional outcome after trochanteric fracture. Int Orthop. 2015;39(7):1405–10.CrossRefPubMed

54.

Müller ME. Die hüftnahen Femurosteotomien. Stuttgart: Thieme, 1957.

Title: The femoral neck-shaft angle on plain radiographs: a systematic review
Authors: Christoph Kolja Boese
Jens Dargel
Johannes Oppermann
Peer Eysel
Max Joseph Scheyerer
Jan Bredow
Philipp Lechler
Publication date: 01-01-2016
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Skeletal Radiology / Issue 1/2016
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2236-z

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

The femoral neck-shaft angle on plain radiographs: a systematic review

Abstract

Objective

Material and methods

Results

Conclusion

ACC 2024 Congress

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Material and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Intramuscular granular cell tumor: emphasizing the stripe sign

Change in editors

Common site of subchondral insufficiency fractures of the femoral head based on three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging

Coronal tibiofemoral subluxation in knee osteoarthritis

Triple-phase contrast-enhanced MRI for the prediction of preoperative chemotherapeutic effect in patients with osteosarcoma: comparison with 99mTc-MIBI scintigraphy

Vertebral lesion distribution in multiple myeloma—assessed by reduced-dose whole-body MDCT