https://www.ijmhr.org/ijar.htm editor_anatomy@ijmhr.org
ISSN:       2321-4281 (E) 2321-8967 (P)

IJAR.2017.167

DOWNLOAD PDF
Table of Contents

Type of Article:  Original Research

Volume 5; Issue 2.1 (April 2017)

Page No.: 3753-3758

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2017.167

MORPHOMETRY OF FEMORAL NECK SHAFT ANGLE IN DRY FEMORA OF SOUTH INDIA BY COMPUTER ASSISTED IMAGE ANALYSIS METHOD

Amith R *1, Beena N 3, Vinay KV 3.

*1 Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, K. S. Hegde Medical Academy, Nitte University, Mangaluru, Karnataka. India.

2 Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, Academy of medical sciences, Pariyaram, Kannur district, Kerala, India.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, K. S. Hegde Medical Academy, Nitte University, Mangaluru, Karnataka. India.

Address for correspondence: Dr. Amith Ramos, Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, K. S. Hegde Medical Academy, Nitte University, Deralakatte, Mangaluru, Karnataka, India. Pin- 575018. Ph: +919986099029, E-Mail: amith_ramos@hotmail.com.

ABSTRACT

Background: The neck-shaft angle (NSA) is the angle formed by the neck axis & the long axis of the femur. Objectives: The objectives of the study were to estimate the following in dry femora of South Indian origin: 1) NSA. 2) Side differences in NSA. 3) Intra observer & inter observer reliability in measuring NSA.  

Material and Methods: About 171 dry adult femora (92 right and 79 left) available in the department of Anatomy were studied. End on digital photographs of the proximal end of the femur & frontal view digital photographs after neutralizing the FA, were utilized to measure the NSA. The axes mentioned above were marked using Microsoft Power Point 2007, after which the images were analyzed. Side differences were determined using the unpaired t-test. Intra observer & inter observer reliability was assessed using Pearson’s correlation coefficient.

Results: The mean NSA was 121.2 º ± 6.2 º (range 93 to 136). No significant side differences were noted. There was good intra & inter observer reliability.

Conclusion: In the present study the mean NSA was 121.2°. No significant side differences in NSA were noted. There was a good intra & inter observer reliability in measuring NSA by using computer assisted image analysis method.

Key words: Femur, femoral neck shaft angle, Shaft axis, Neck axis.

REFERENCES

  1. Reikeras O, Hoiseth A, Reigstad A, Fonstelien E. Femoral neck angles. Acta orthop. Scand. 1982;53: 775-79.
  2. Standring S, Borley NR, Collins P, Crossman AR, Gatzoulis MA, Healy JC et al, editors. Gray’s anatomy: The Anatomical basis of clinical practice. 40th UK, Elsevier Ltd;2008:1412-15.
  3. Samaha AA, Ivanov AV, Haddad JJ, Kolesnik II and Baydoum S et al. Biomechanical and system analysis of the human femoral bone: Correlation and anatomical approach. J. Orthop. Surg. Res. 2007;2:8.
  4. Kate BR and Robert SL. The angle of femoral torsion. Journal of Anatomical Society of India 1963;12: 8-11.
  5. Tian TP, Chen Y, Leow WK, Hsu W, Howe TS and Png MA. Computing Neck-Shaft Angle of Femur for X-Ray Fracture Detection . NMRC 2000.
  6. Kay RM, Jaki KA, Skaggs DL. The effect of femoral rotation on the projected femoral neck shaft angle. J Pediatr Orthop. 2000;20:736–9.
  7. Deshmukh TR, Kuthe AM, Ingole DS, Takre SB. Prediction of femur bone geometry using anthropometric data of indian population: A numerical approach. J. Med Sci, 2010;10(1):12-18.
  8. Hitt K, Shurman JR, Greene K, McCarthy J, Moskal J, Hoeman T and Mont MA. Anthropometric measurements of the human knee: Correlation to the sizing of current knee arthroplasty systems. JBJS 2003;85:115-122.
  9. McGrory J, Morrey BF, Cahalan TD, Kai-Nan AN and Cabanela ME. Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty. J. Bone Joint Surg. 1995;77:865-9.
  10. Gnudi S, Ripamonti C, Lisi L, Fini M, Giardino R, Giavaresi G. Proximal femur geometry to detect and distinguish femoral neck fractures in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 2002;13:69-73.
  11. 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. The British journal of radiology 2011;84:375-79.
  12. Maheswari AV, Jain AK, Singh MP, Bhargava SK. Estimation of femoral neck anteversion in adults: A comparison between preoperative, clinical and X-ray methods. Indian J Orthop. 2004;38:151-7.
  13. Jain AK, Maheshwari AV, Singh MP, Nath S, Bhargav SK. Femoral neck anteversion: A comprehensive Indian study. Indian J. Orthop. 2005;39:137-144.
  14. Umebese PF,Adeyekun A, Moin M. Radiological assessment of femoral neck-shaft & anteversion angles in adult Nigerian HIPS. Niger Postgrad Med J. 2005 Jun;12(2):106-9.
  15. Inam M, Satar A, Arif M, Shabir M. Proximal femoral geometry of Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa (KPK) population. The journal of Pakistan Orthopaedic Association. 2011 Jun;23 (2).
  16. Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal Femoral Anatomy in the Normal Human Population. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:876-85.
  17. Saikia KC, Bhuyan S, Rongphar R. Anthropometric study of the hip joint in Northeastern region population with computed topography scan. Indian J Orthop. 2008;42:260-6.
  18. Siwach RC, Dahiya S. Anthropometric study of proximal femur geometry & its clinical application. Indian J Orthop. 2003;37:247-51.
  19. Anderson JY, Trinkaus E. Patterns of sexual, bilateral & interpopulational variation in human femoral neck-shaft angles. J. 1998;192:279-85.
  20. Issac B, Vettivel S, Prasad R, Jeyaseelan L, Chandi G. Prediction of the femoral neck shaft angle from the length of the femoral neck. Clin Anat. 1997;10:318-23.
  21. Laplaza FJ, Root L, Tassanawipas A, Glasser DB. Femoral torsion & neck-shaft angles in cerebral palsy. Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics 1993;13:192-9.
  22. Yamaguchi O. A radiologic study of the hip joint in cerebral palsy. Journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association 1993;67:1-11.
  23. Serafimov L. Biomechanical infuence of the innominate osteotomy on the growth of the upper part of the femur. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 1974;98:39-40.
  24. Loder RT, Aronson D, Greenfield ML. The epidemiology of slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery 1993;75(A):141-7.
  25. Saji MJ, Upadhyay SS, Leong JCY. Increased femoral neck-shaft angles in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1995;20:303-11.
  26. Radin E, Paul IL. The biomechanics of congenital dislocated hips & their treatment. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research 1974;98:32-8.
  27. Moore RJ, Fazzalari NL, Manthey BA, Vernon RB. The relationship between neck-shaft angle, calcar width, articular cartilage thickness & bone volume in arthrosis of the hip. British Journal of Rheumatology. 1994;33:432-6.
  28. Tuck SP, Rawlings DJ, Scane AC, Pande I, Summers GD, Woolf AD et al. Femoral Neck Shaft Angle in Men with Fragility Fractures Journal of Osteoporosis. 2011;7pages.
  29. Upadhyay SS, Burwell RG, Moulton A, Small PG, Wallace WA. Femoral anteversion in healthy children: application of a new method using ultrasound. J Anat. 1987;169:49-61.
  30. Nagar M, Bhardawaj R, Prakash R. Anteversion in adult Indian femora. J Anat Soc India 2000;49:9-12.
  31. Labronici PJ, Castro GN, Neto SR, Gomes HC, Hoffmann R, Neto JN et al., Femoral anteversion & the neck-shaft angle: relationship with hip osteoarthritis. bras. Ortop. 2011;46(1).
  32. Chung CY, Lee KM, Park MS, Lee SH, Choi IH, Cho TJ. Validity & reliability of measuring femoral anteversion & neck shaft angle in patients with cerebral palsy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010 May 01;92(5):1195-1205.

Cite this article: Amith R, Beena N, Vinay KV. MORPHOMETRY OF FEMORAL NECK SHAFT ANGLE IN DRY FEMORA OF SOUTH INDIA BY COMPUTER ASSISTED IMAGE ANALYSIS METHOD. Int J Anat Res 2017;5(2.1):3753-3758. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2017.167