An Osteometric Study of Proximal and Distal Femur Morphology

Year 2015, Volume: 40 Issue: 3, 466 - 473, 30.09.2015

Sema Özandaç , Pınar Göker Ahmet Yücel Memduha Bozkır

https://doi.org/10.17826/cutf.82812

Cited By: 3

Abstract

Purpose: The current study was undertaken to determine the surgically relevant parameters of proximal and distal femur from right and left femora in our population. Methods: These measurements were taken from 400 adult femora (200 right, 200 left) from Department of Anatomy laboratory of Çukurova University, Faculty of Medicine using an electronic digital caliper and goniometer. The mean values of the neck of the length (NL), maximum femoral length (FL), the length of femoral shaft (FSL), intertrochanteric apical axis length (ITAAL), maximum vertical diameter of the femoral head (VDH), neck shaft angle (NSA), superiorinferior femoral neck diameter (SID) and intercondylar notch witch (ICNW) were taken. Results: The mean values of these measurements were found to be 22.2 ± 3.0 mm, 429.5 ± 35.0 mm, 306.5 ± 26.7 mm, 61.9 ± 5.7 mm, 44.2 ± 3.8 mm, 121.10 ± 4.00 , 30.8 ± 3.1 and 2.4 ± 0.2 cm in the right side respectively. However, in the left side same dimensions were 22.5 ± 4.4 mm, 431.3 ±26.2 mm, 299.5 ± 59.4 mm, 61.4 ± 5.1 mm, 44.2 ± 3.3 mm, 121.2 ± 4.0 0 , 30.0 ± 2.9 and 2.3 ± 0.2 cm respectively. Conclusion: The observations presented in the report have defined anatomic parameters that need to be taken into consideration when surgical procedures are performed in hip and knee area for this population.

Keywords

Femur morphometry, Proximal femur and Distal femur

Proksimal ve Distal Femur Morfolojisinin Osteometrik Değerleri

Abstract

Amaç: Çalışmamızda, popülasyonumuzdaki sağ ve sol distal ve proksimal femurun cerrahi olarak ilgili ölçüm değerlerinin belirlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. Materyal ve Metod: Laboratuvarımızda bulunan 400 adet femurda milimetrik bir kumpas ve goniometre yardımıyla collum femoris ve femur’un maksimum uzunluğu ortalaması, femur şaftı uzunluğu ortalaması, linea intertrochanterica ile fovea capitis arasındaki uzaklık (intertrokanterik apikal aks uzunluğu) ortalaması, caput femoris’in maksimum vertikal uzunluk ortalaması, femur boyun şaft açısı ortalaması, collum femoris’in supero-inferior uzunluk ortalaması ve intercondylar mesafe uzunluğu ortalaması ölçülmüştür. Bulgular: Ölçümlerimize ait değerler sırasıyla; sağda 22.2 ± 3.0 mm, 429.5 ± 35.0 mm, 306.5 ± 26.7 mm, 61.9 ± 5.7 mm, 44.2 ± 3.8 mm, 121.1 ± 4.00, 30.8 ± 3.1 ve 2.4 ± 0.2 cm bulunurken, aynı değerler sol tarafta 22.5 ± 4.4 mm, 431.3 ±26.2 mm, 299.5 ± 59.4 mm, 61.4 ± 5.1 mm, 44.2 ± 3.3 mm, 121.2 ± 4.00, 30.0 ± 2.9 ve 2.3 ± 0.2 cm olarak bulunmuştur. Sonuç: Çalışmamızda elde edilen değerlerin popülasyonumuzda yapılacak olan kalça ve diz ile ilgili cerrahi girişimlerde yardımcı olacağını düşünmekteyiz

Keywords

Femur morfometrisi, proksimal femur ve distal femur

References

• Prasad R, Vettivel S, Jeyaseelan L, Isaac B, Chandi G. Reconstruction of femur length from markers Its proksimal end. Clinical Anatomy. 1996;9:28-33.
• Moore KL, Dalley AF. Clinically Oriented Anatomy. 4nd 1999;504-22. Canada.
• Didia BC, Nwajagu GN, Dapper DV. Femoral Intercondylar Notch (ICN) width in Nigerians: Its relationship of femur length. West Afr J Med. 2002;21:265-68.
• Williams PL, Bannister LH, Berry MM, Collins P, Dyson M, Dussek JE, Ferguson MWJ. Skeletal system: In Gray’s Anatomy. 38th ed., Churchill Livingstone. Newyork. 1995;678.
• Isaac R, Vettivel S, Prasad R, Jeyaseelan L, Chandi G. Prediction of the femoral neck-shaft angle from the length of the femoral neck. Clinical anatomy. 1997;10:318-23.
• Seidemann RM, Stojanowski CM, Doran GH. The use of the supero-inferior femoral neck diameter as a sex assessor. American Journal of physical anthropology. 1998;107:305-13.
• Gill GW. Racial variation in the proximal and distal femur: heritability and forensic utility. J. Forensic Sci. 2001;46:791-9.
• Yang RS, Wang SS, Liu TK. Proximal femoral dimension in elderly chinese women with hip fractures in taiwan. Osteoporosis International. 1999;10:109-13.
• Gnudi S, Ripamonti C, Gualtieri G, Malavolta N. Geometry of proximal femur in the prediction of hip fracture in osteoporotic women. The British Journal of Radiology. 1999;72:729-33.
• Byrne DP, Mulhall KJ, Baker JF. Anatomy & Biomechanics of the hip. The open sports medicine Journal. 2010;4,51-7.
• Tahir A, Hassan AW, Umar IM. A study of the collodiaphyseal angle of the femur in the North- Eastern subregion of nigeria. Niger J. Med. 2001;10:34-6.
• Terzidis I, Totlis T, Papathanasiou E, Sideridis A, Vlasis K, Natsis K. Gender and side to side differences osteometric data from 360 caucasian dried femori. Hindavi Publishing Corporation anatomy research International. 2012;1-6.
• condyles morphology: 13. Perret VA, Staccini P, Quatrehomme G.
• Reexamination of a measurement for sexual
• determination using the supero-inferior femoral neck
• diameter in a modern european population.
• J.Forensic Sci. 2003;48:517-21.
• Asala SA. Mbajiorgu FE, Papandro BA. A comparative study of femoral head diameters and sex differentiation in Nigerians. Acta anatomy. 1998;162: 232-7.
• Asala SA. The efficiency of the demarking point of the femoral head as a sex determining parameter. Forensic Science International. 2002;127:114-8.
• Asala SA. Sex determination from the head of the femur of South african whites and blacks. Forensic science international. 2001;117:15-22.
• Chareancholvanich K, Narkbunnam R. Novel method of measuring patellar height ratio using a distal Orthopaedics. 2012;36:749-53. point. International
• Good L, Odensten M, Gillquist J. Intercondylar notch measurements with special reference to anterior cruciate 1991;2:185-9. Clinical Orthop.
• Laprade RF, Burnett QM. Femoral intercondylar notch stenosis and correlation to anterior cruciate ligament injuries. A prospective study. Am J Sports Med. 1994;22:198-202.
• Wada M, Tatsuo H, Baba H, Asamoto K, Nojyo A. Femoral intercondylar notch measurements in osteoarthritic knees. Rheumatology.1994;38:554-8.
• 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. Singapore Med J. 2012;53: 587-90.
• Nidugala H, Bhaskar B, Suresh S, Avadhani R. Metric assessment of femur using discriminant function analysis in south indian population. Int J Anat Res. 2013;1: 29-32.
• Duthie RA, Bruce MF, Hutchison JD. Changing proximal femoral geometry in north east scotland: an osteometric study. BMJ open respiratory research. 1998;316:1498.
• Pandya AM, Singel TC, Akbari VJ, Dangar KP, Tank KC, Patel MP. Sexual dimorphism of maximum femoral length. National Research. 2011;1; 67-70. Journal of Medical
• Ranade A, McCarthy JJ, Davidson RS. Acetabular changes in coxa vara. Clinical Orthop Relat Res.2008;466: 1688-91.
• Michelotti J, Clark J. Femoral neck length and hip fracture risk. 1999;14:1714-9.
• Boonen S, Koutri R, Dequeker J, Aerssens J, Lowet GJN, Verbeke G, Lesaffre E, Geusens P. Measurement of femoral geometry in type I and type II osteoporosis: Differences in hip axis length consistent with heterogeneity in the pathogenesis of osteoporotic 1995;10:1908-12. Bone Miner Res.
• Faulkner KG, McClung M, Cummings SR. (1994) Automated evaluation of the hip axis length for predicting hip fracture. J Bone Miner Res. 1994;9:1065-70.
• Karlsson KM, Sernbo I, Obrant KJ, Redlung JI, Johnell O. Femoral neck geometry and radiographic signs of osteoporosis as predictors of hip fracture. Bone.1996;18:327-30.
• Partanen J, Jamsa T, Jalovaara P. Influence of the upper femur and pelvic geometry on the risk and type of hip fractures. 2001;16:1540-7.
• Soininvaara TA, Miettinen HJA, Jurvelin JS, Suomalainen OT, Alhava EM, Kröger HPJ. Periprosthetic femoral bone loss after total knee arthroplasty: 1 year follow up study of 69 patients. The Knee. 2004;11;297-302.
• Järvenpää J, Soininvaara T, Kettunen J, Miettinen H, Kröger H. Changes in bone mineral density of the distal femur after total knee arthroplasty: A 7 year DEXA follow up comparing results between obese and nonobese patients. The Knee. 2014;21:232-5.