Literature DB >> 10491219

Femoral neck length and hip fracture risk.

J Michelotti1, J Clark.   

Abstract

To determine whether there are differences in femoral skeletal geometry in fracture-prone subjects when size, positioning diagnosis, and age are controlled, we compared femoral measurements made from the uninvolved hip on 119 plane anteroposterior pelvis radiographs of women without fracture to those of the contralateral hip in a group of 43 female patients with hip fractures (neck, 23; intertrochanteric, 20). The hip was imaged in a standardized position of rotation and adduction. Race, age, and musculoskeletal diagnosis were known. Subjects were grouped by diagnosis of the opposite hip condition (rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis, and normal) and compared. Measurements were also analyzed as ratios to head diameter (HD), neck diameter (ND), and pelvic width. Femoral neck length (NL) was measured from skeletal preparations and imaged in controlled positions of abduction and external rotation. No differences were found between the neck and intertrochanteric fracture groups. The differences between the fracture group and the controls were a thinner femoral cortex (measured at a point one head radius below the lesser trochanter) a larger femoral head, and a larger femoral ND in the fracture group (p < 0.025). The difference in cortical thickness was still significant when scaled by size, but the ratio of HD to ND was equivalent in fractures and controls. No difference in femoral NL could be demonstrated. The experimental measurements showed that apparent NL is significantly position sensitive and this may explain previously reported differences in fracture-prone groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10491219     DOI: 10.1359/jbmr.1999.14.10.1714

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Miner Res        ISSN: 0884-0431            Impact factor:   6.741


  36 in total

1.  Combination of bone mineral density and upper femur geometry improves the prediction of hip fracture.

Authors:  Pasi Pulkkinen; Juha Partanen; Pekka Jalovaara; Timo Jämsä
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-02-03       Impact factor: 4.507

2.  Three-dimensional X-ray absorptiometry (3D-XA): a method for reconstruction of human bones using a dual X-ray absorptiometry device.

Authors:  S Kolta; A Le Bras; D Mitton; V Bousson; J A de Guise; J Fechtenbaum; J D Laredo; C Roux; W Skalli
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-12-14       Impact factor: 4.507

3.  Image resolution and magnification using a cone beam densitometer: optimizing data acquisition for hip morphometric analysis.

Authors:  V Boudousq; D Mariano Goulart; J M Dinten; C Caderas de Kerleau; E Thomas; O Mares; P O Kotzki
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2004-10-16       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 4.  Bone geometry and skeletal fragility.

Authors:  Mary L Bouxsein; David Karasik
Journal:  Curr Osteoporos Rep       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 5.096

5.  Proximal hip geometry is linked to several chromosomal regions: genome-wide linkage results from the Framingham Osteoporosis Study.

Authors:  S Demissie; J Dupuis; L A Cupples; T J Beck; D P Kiel; D Karasik
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2006-10-31       Impact factor: 4.398

6.  Bivariate linkage study of proximal hip geometry and body size indices: the Framingham study.

Authors:  D Karasik; J Dupuis; L A Cupples; T J Beck; M C Mahaney; L M Havill; D P Kiel; S Demissie
Journal:  Calcif Tissue Int       Date:  2007-08-03       Impact factor: 4.333

7.  Femoral neck geometry and hip fracture risk: the Geelong osteoporosis study.

Authors:  S El-Kaissi; J A Pasco; M J Henry; S Panahi; J G Nicholson; G C Nicholson; M A Kotowicz
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2005-08-05       Impact factor: 4.507

Review 8.  Bone quality: the determinants of bone strength and fragility.

Authors:  Hélder Fonseca; Daniel Moreira-Gonçalves; Hans-Joachim Appell Coriolano; José Alberto Duarte
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 11.136

9.  Influence of acetabular and femoral version on fractures of the femoral neck.

Authors:  A Frost; G Pavlou; P J Richards; J Belcher; V Jasani
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-12-05       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Use of DXA-based structural engineering models of the proximal femur to discriminate hip fracture.

Authors:  Lang Yang; Nicola Peel; Jackie A Clowes; Eugene V McCloskey; Richard Eastell
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 6.741

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.