Top

International Orthopaedics

Published in:

Open Access 01-04-2021 | Hip-TEP | Original Paper

Radiographic analysis of the proximal femoral anatomy in the Croatian population

Authors: Hrvoje Mokrovic, Simona Komen, Leo Gulan, Gordan Gulan

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 4/2021

Abstract

Purpose

The goal of total hip endoprosthesis is to achieve painless and functional hip for long term. Accurate reconstruction of hip anatomy largely depends on the implant design. In order to select an implant in correspondence with the native hip, the proximal femoral morphology has been in focus of many studies in the past years. The purpose of this study is to analyze proximal femoral geometry in the Croatian population by radiographic evaluation.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study analyzing conventional radiographies of the hip, obtained within the last four years from the database of Clinic for Orthopaedic Surgery Lovran. The number of studied patients was 300,168 women and 132 men. The proximal femoral geometric parameters assessed were as follows: femoral head diameter, femoral neck length, neck-shaft angle, angle of femoral neck anteversion, and lateral femoral offset. The results obtained were compared between genders and with results of other studies.

Results

Proximal femoral anatomy differed in femoral head diameter and lateral femoral offset between males and females in our group of patients, while femoral neck length, femoral neck shaft angle, and femoral neck anteversion have shown similar values in both genders. Our study also showed specificity of the Croatian population in almost all parameters of proximal femoral anatomy, in comparison with other ethnic groups.

Conclusion

Our results support the observation on high diversity in the morphology of the proximal femur and the specificity of the proximal femoral anatomy of the Croatian population.

Singh JA (2011) Epidemiology of knee and hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. The open orthopaedics journal 5:80–85. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874325001105010080CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Faizan A, Gerges JJ, Asencio G, Essig J, Munini E, Hozack WJ (2016) Changes in femoral version during implantation of anatomic stems: implications on stem design. J Arthroplast 31(2):512–516CrossRef

Mahmood SS, Mukka SS, Crnalic S, Wretenberg P, Sayed-Noor AS (2016) Association between changes in global femoral offset after total hip arthroplasty and function, quality of life and abductor muscle strength. Acta Orthopaedica 87(1):36–41CrossRefPubMed

Fessy MH, Seutin B, Bdjui J (1997) Anatomical basis for the choice of the femoral implant in the total hip arthroplasty. Surg Radiol Anat 19:283–286CrossRefPubMed

Edwards K, Leyland K, Arden C, Spector T, Nelson A, Jordan J, Nevitt M, Hunter D.(2016) Interaction between race and sex in measures of hip morphology. A population-based comparative study. Osteoarthritis and Cartilage, 24:p.243

Rawal BR, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N (2012) Anthropometric measurements to design best fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian Journal of Orthopaedics 46(1):46–53CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Nelson DA, Megyesi MS (2004) Sex and ethnic differences in bone architecture. Current Osteoporosis Reports 2:65–69CrossRefPubMed

Magilligan, Donald J. (1956) Calculation of the angle of anteversion by means of horizontal lateral roentgenography. Journal of Bone &JointSurgery, 38(6):p.1231–1246

Markus DS, Thomas P, Thomas JH, Jan S, Ulrich B (2010) Radiological determination of the anatomic hip centre from pelvic landmarks. Acta Orthopedica Belgica 76:479–485

10.

Sengodan VC, Sinmayanantham E, Kumar JS (2017) Anthropometric analysis of the hip joint in South Indian population using computed tomography. Indian journal of orthopaedics 51(2):155–161. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.201709CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Roy S, Kundu R, Medda S, Gupta A, Nanrah BK (2014) Evaluation of proximal femoral geometry in plain anterior-posterior radiograph in eastern-Indian population. J Clin Diagn Res 8(9):AC01–AAC3. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2014/9269.4852CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

12.

Kristiansen B, Jorgensen L, Holmich P (1985) Dislocation following total hip arthroplasty. Archives of Orthopaedic Trauma Surgery 103:375–377CrossRef

13.

Boese CK, Dargel J, Oppermann J, Eysel P, Scheyerer MJ, Bredow J et al (2016) The femoral neck-shaft angle on plain radiographs: a systematic review. Skelet Radiol 45(1):19–28CrossRef

14.

Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P (2013) Femoral neck-shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. J Anat 223(2):133–151CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Acar N, Unal M (2017) Radiological evaluation of the proximal femoral geometric features in the Turkish population. Medical Journal of Suleyman Demirel University, 24(4);p.127–134. https://doi.org/10.17343/sdutfd.285078

16.

Rubin PJ, Leyuraz PF, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN, Esteve P, de Roguin B.(1992) The morphology of the proximal femur. A three dimensional radiographic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg[Br],74(1):p.28−32. 10.1302/0301-620X.74B1.1732260

17.

Husmann O, Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, de Roguin B, Argenson JN (1987) Three dimensional morphology of the proximal femur. J Arthroplasty 12:444–450CrossRef

18.

Reikerås O, Høiseth A, Reigstad A, Fönstelien E (1982) Femoral neck angles: a specimen study with special regard to bilateral differences. Acta Orthop Scand 53(5):775–779CrossRefPubMed

19.

Unnanuntana A, Toogood P, Hart D, Cooperman D, Grant RE.(2010) Evaluation of proximal femoral geometry using digital photographs. Journal of Orthopaedic Research. 28:p.1399–404

20.

Cho HJ, Kwak DS, Kim IB. (2015) Morphometric evaluation of Korean femur by geometric computation: comparisons of the sex and the population. Biomed Res Int, 2015:730538. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/730538

21.

Lin KJ, Wei HW, Lin KP, Tsai CL, Lee PY. (2014) Proximal femoral morphology and the relevance to design of Anatomically precontoured plates: a study of the Chinese population. The Scientific World Journal. 2014:106941, https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/106941

22.

Minakshi Verma et al.(2017) Morphometry of proximal femur in Indian population. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, 11(2): p. AC01-AC04

23.

Fischer CS, Kühn JP, Völzke H, Ittermann T, Gümbel D, Kasch R, Haralambiev L, Laqua R, Hinz P, Lange J (2020) The neck-shaft angle: an update on reference values and associated factors. Acta Orthop 91(1):53–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2019.1690873CrossRefPubMed

24.

Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P.(2013) Femoral neck-shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. Journal of anatomy 223 (2): p.133-51

25.

Dolan MM, Heyworth BE, Bedi A, Duke G, Kelly BT (2011) CT reveals a high incidence of osseous abnormalities in hips with labral tears. Clinical Orthopaedics Related Research 469(3):831–838CrossRefPubMed

26.

Renkawitz T, Weber T, Dullien S, Woerner M, Dendorfer S, Grifka J, Weber M (2016) Leg length and offset differences above 5mm after total hip arthroplasty are associated with altered gait kinematics. Gait & posture 49:196–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2016.07.011CrossRef

27.

Jolles BM, Zangger P, Leyvraz PF (2002) Factors predisposing to dislocation after primary total hip arthroplasty: a multivariate analysis. J Arthroplasty 17:282CrossRefPubMed

28.

Hayashi, S., Hashimoto, S., Matsumoto, T., Takayama, K., Nishida, K., Ishida, K., & Kuroda, R. (2017). Stem anteversion mismatch to the anatomical anteversion causes loss of periprosthetic bone density after THA. Journal of orthopaedic surgery (Hong Kong), 25(3):P.1-6, https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499017739478

29.

Hirata M, Nakashima Y, Itokawa T, Ohishi M, Sato T, Akiyama M, Hara D, Iwamoto Y (2014) Influencing factors for the increased stem version compared to the native femur in cementless total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 38:1341–1346CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

30.

Suh KT, Kang JH, Roh HL, Moon KP, Kim HJ (2006) True femoral anteversion during primary total hip arthroplasty: use of postoperative computed tomography-based sections. J Arthroplasty 21:599–605CrossRefPubMed

Title: Radiographic analysis of the proximal femoral anatomy in the Croatian population
Authors: Hrvoje Mokrovic
Simona Komen
Leo Gulan
Gordan Gulan
Publication date: 01-04-2021
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Hip-TEP
Hip-TEP
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 4/2021
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-021-04942-5

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Radiographic analysis of the proximal femoral anatomy in the Croatian population

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2021

The effect of pre-operative high doses of methylprednisolone on pain management and convalescence after total hip replacement in elderly: a double-blind randomized study

Cementless femoral stem fixation and leg-length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty in different proximal femoral morphological types

Bernese peri-acetabular osteotomy performed with navigation and patient-specific templates is a reproducible and safe procedure

Central and Eastern Europe actual orthopaedics profile

T-condylar humerus fracture in children: treatment options and outcomes

‘Images from our orthopaedic hospital’: photography in the rehabilitation of disabled war veterans in Croatia during the First World War