Objective To measure the morphological parameters of the proximal femur in Mongolian population and to provide reference for prosthesis design, improvement and preoperative prosthesis selection. Methods A total of 331 mongolian patients who received femur radiographs in the three tertiary hospitals were randomly selected, including 152 males, and 179 females. Huahai PACS system was used to measure femoral head diameter (FHD), femoral offset (FO), femoral neck shaft Angle (FNSA), medullary transverse diameter at the lesser trochanter (T0), Medullary transverse diameter at the 20 mm above lesser trochanter (T+20), medullary transverse diameter at the 20 mm below lesser trochanter (T-20), medullary transverse diameter of isthmus, canal flare index (CFI) and metaphyseal canal flare index (MCFI). SPSS25.0 was used to analyze the gender differences of these parameters and their correlation with age, and the differences between the femoral parameters of the Mongolian population and domestic and foreign regions were mainly compared. Results (1) The MCFI was larger in females, and there were no significant differences in FNSA and CFI between genders, while the other result of parameters were larger in males. (2) The inner diameter of the medullary cavity at T-20 level and isthmus level was positively correlated with age, CFI and MCFI were negatively correlated with age, and the other parameters were not correlated with age. (3) The anatomical parameters of proximal femur in Mongolian population were different from those in different regions at home and abroad. Compared with the southern population in China, the FHD, FO, the inner diameter of the medullary cavity at T0 level, T+20 level, T-20 level and isthmus level were larger in Mongolian population, while the FNSA, CFI and MCFI were smaller. Conclusions Compared with the southern population, the Mongolian population had larger FHD, FO, wider inner diameter of the proximal femoral medulla cavity, smaller FNSA, CFI and MCFI. Preoperative selection and design of prostheses should take into account the differences between different regions and nationalities.
Key words
Inner Mongolia /
/
/
South China /
/
/
Gender /
/
/
X-ray /
/
/
Morphology of the proximal femur
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
References
[1] Ferguson RJ, Palmer AJ, Taylor A, et al. Hip replacement[J]. Lancet, 2018, 392(10158): 1662-1671. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31777-X.
[2] Claßen T, Scheid C, Landgraeber S, et al. Characteristics of elective hip replacement in the elderly[J]. Orthopade, 2017, 46(1): 25-33. DOI: 10.1007/s00132-016-3364-4.
[3] Faizan A, Gerges JJ, Asencio G, et al. Changes in femoral version during implantation of anatomic stems: implications on stem design[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2016, 31(2): 512-516. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.09.008.
[4] Mahmood SS, Mukka SS, Crnalic S, et al. Association between changes in global femoral offset after total hip arthroplasty and function, quality of life, and abductor muscle strength. A prospective cohort study of 222 patients[J]. Acta Orthop, 2016, 87(1): 36-41. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1091955.
[5] Casper DS, Kim GK, Parvizi J, et al. Morphology of the proximal femur differs widely with age and sex: relevance to design and selection of femoral prostheses[J]. J Orthop Res, 2012, 30(7): 1162-1166. DOI: 10.1002/jor.22052.
[6] Mokrovic H, Komen S, Gulan L, et al. Radiographic analysis of the proximal femoral anatomy in the Croatian population[J]. Int Orthop, 2021, 45(4): 923-929. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-021-04942-5.
[7] 丁悦, 刘尚礼, 马若凡, 等. 国人股骨假体设计的解剖学基础[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2003(4): 341-343. DOI: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2003.04.016.
[8] 张洋, 王健, 李郅涵, 等. 与关节置换相关的华南地区健康成人髋关节形态测量[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2013, 21(13): 1328-1333. DOI: 10.3977/j.issn.1005-8478.2013.13.13.
[9] 白波, 董伟强. 中国华南地区髋关节的测量参数及临床意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2004(6): 592-595. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-165X.2004.06.009.
[10]皮益刚, 赵耀超, 王万春, 等. 500例湖南地区股骨近端形态样本测量分析[J]. 中南大学学报(医学版), 2013, 38(9): 925-930. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7347.2013.09.010.
[11]章晓云, 陈跃平, 曹桢斌, 等. 广西地区壮族人群正常髋关节形态学研究[J].中国骨质疏松杂志, 2015, 21(11): 1351-1356, 1365. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7108.2015.011.012.
[12]Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, et al. The anatomic basis of femoral component design[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1988, (235): 148-165. PMID: 3416522.
[13]刘力铭, 雷凯, 范华全, 等. 股骨颈干角在前后位X线平片与CT三维重建图像上的差异性研究[J]. 第三军医大学学报, 2020, 42(21): 2134-2140. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.202006166.
[14]Kim JM, Hong SH, Kim JM, et al. Femoral shaft bowing in the coronal plane has more significant effect on the coronal alignment of TKA than proximal or distal variations of femoral shape[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2015, 23(7): 1936-1942. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3006-5.
[15]Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E, et al. The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stems: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2000, 15(1): 93-101. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(00)91337-8.
[16]Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, et al. The morphology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radiographic analysis[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1992, 74(1): 28-32. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.74B1.1732260.
[17]Monti L, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. Methods for quantitative analysis of the primary stability in uncemented hip prostheses[J]. Artif Organs, 1999, 23(9): 851-859. DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1594.1999.06287.x.
[18]李建新, 刘梅. 我国少数民族人口现状及变化特点[J]. 西北民族研究, 2019(4): 120-137. DOI: 10.16486/j.cnki.62-1035/d.20191203.012.
[19]李咏兰, 郑连斌. 中国人群的体部指数[J]. 人类学学报, 2022, 41(5): 848-861. DOI: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/aas.2021.0059.
[20]Tarasevicius S, Kesteris U, Robertsson O, et al. Femoral head diameter affects the revision rate in total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 1,720 hip replacements with 9-21 years of follow-up[J]. Acta Orthop, 2006, 77(5): 706-709. DOI: 10.1080/17453670610012872.
[21]Amlie E, Høvik Ø, Reikerås O. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty with 28 and 32-mm femoral head[J]. J Orthop Traumatol, 2010, 11(2): 111-115. DOI: 10.1007/s10195-010-0097-8.
[22] Tsikandylakis G, Kärrholm J, Hailer NP, et al. No Increase in survival for 36-mm versus 32-mm femoral heads in metal-on-polyethylene THA: a registry study[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2018, 476(12): 2367-2378. DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000508.
[23]Heckmann N, Ihn H, Stefl M, et al. Early results from the american joint replacement registry: a comparison with other national registries[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2019, 34(7S): S125-S134.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.12.027.
[24]Clement ND, S Patrick-Patel R, MacDonald D, et al. Total hip replacement: increasing femoral offset improves functional outcome[J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2016, 136(9): 1317-1323. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-016-2527-4.
[25]Lecerf G, Fessy MH, Philippot R, et al. Femoral offset: anatomical concept, definition, assessment, implications for preoperative templating and hip arthroplasty[J]. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2009, 95(3): 210-219. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2009.03.010.
[26]McGrory BJ, Morrey BF, Cahalan TD, et al. Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1995, 77(6): 865-869. PMID: 7593096.
[27]Charles MN, Bourne RB, Davey JR, et al. Soft-tissue balancing of the hip: the role of femoral offset restoration[J]. Instr Course Lect, 2005, (54): 131-141. PMID: 15948440.
[28]Bachour F, Marchetti E, Bocquet D, et al. Radiographic preoperative templating of extra-offset cemented THA implants: how reliable is it and how does it affect survival[J]? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2010, 96(7): 760-768. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2010.05.004.
[29]Noble PC, Box GG, Kamaric E, et al. The effect of aging on the shape of the proximal femur[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1995, (316): 31-44. PMID: 7634721.
PDF(2664 KB)
