Literature DB >> 20697495

Anthropometric study of hip with computed tomography scan.

Aditya V Maheshwari1.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Year:  2010        PMID: 20697495      PMCID: PMC2911942          DOI: 10.4103/0019-5413.65135

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Indian J Orthop        ISSN: 0019-5413            Impact factor:   1.251


× No keyword cloud information.
Sir, I read with great interest the manuscript by Saikia et al. ‘Anthropometric study of the hip joint in North-Eastern region population with computed tomography scan”.1 I must congratulate the authors for this study. Although there is enough Western literature on this topic, Indian literature is sparse. Thus this data warrants attention considering the fact that more than 1/6th of the world’s population is from the Indian origin. However, I would like to draw attention to two particular values; femoral anteversion (FNA) and the femoral neck shaft angles (FNS). The mean FNA in this study was 20.4° (8°-40°) and the mean FNS was 139.5° (118°-150°). Although the mean may not be the best values to compare, the median values are also higher (20° and 140°). Thus, both FNA and FNS in this study appear pathologic when compared to normal values on various Caucasian and Mongoloids races as well as on Indian subjects.2–10 These studies have shown the normal mean FNA as 8-15° with a normal FNS of 123-135°. In several previous studies,3–7 the mean FNA was around 8°, whereas this was the minimum value in the study by Saikia et al. In our previous unpublished CT study (Indian Orthopaedic Association Conference (IOACON) 2002; Agra, India), the mean FNS in normal Indian adults was 130°. More than 80% of the cases had FNS less than 135° and only 2.5% of the cases had FNS over 140°. Similarly, in another Indian study the maximum FNS was 140°.8 The mean acetabular anteversion (AA) in this study (18.2°) was comparable to the Western studies510 and to 19° in our previous unpublished CT study on normal Indian adults (IOACON 2002; Agra, India). Thus increased FNA would create incongruence at the hip leading to uneven joint force reactions and ultimately leading to instability and/or accelerated osteoarthritis (OA).10 However, to the best of our knowledge, the incidence of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and/or primary OA of the hip has not been reported to be higher in the North Eastern population as compared to the rest of India or the world. Apart from the consideration of implant design, the other implication of increased FNA would be during cup implantation in a non-cemented total hip arthroplasty, where the cup needs to be put in less anteversion to be in a ‘safe zone’ of combined anteversion for increased stability and reduced wear.11 We agree that racial and geographic variations do exist in proximal femoral morphology. But it is still difficult to accept these higher values as normal. One explanation of these higher values may be the authors’ use of Murphy et al. method,12 which uses the center of the head rather than the center of the neck for estimation of the FNA. Several studies have shown that majority of the femoral heads are not in the center of the femoral neck.371213 In spite of all these possible explanations, the findings of this study 1 still show an incomprehensible difference, not only when compared with international literature but also with other Indian studies.
  11 in total

1.  Anteversion of the femoral neck in Indian dry femora.

Authors:  A K Jain; Aditya V Maheshwari; S Nath; M P Singh; M Nagar
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 1.601

Review 2.  Impingement with total hip replacement.

Authors:  Aamer Malik; Aditya Maheshwari; Lawrence D Dorr
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Prediction of the femoral neck-shaft angle from the length of the femoral neck.

Authors:  B Isaac; S Vettivel; R Prasad; L Jeyaseelan; G Chandi
Journal:  Clin Anat       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 2.414

4.  Femoral anteversion.

Authors:  S B Murphy; S R Simon; P K Kijewski; R H Wilkinson; N T Griscom
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  The direct radiographic measurement of femoral torsion using axial tomography: technic comparison with an indirect radiographic method.

Authors:  D D Hubbard; L T Staheli
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1972 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  The anatomy and functional axes of the femur.

Authors:  Y Yoshioka; D Siu; T D Cooke
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1987-07       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Anteversion of the acetabulum and femoral neck in normals and in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip.

Authors:  O Reikerås; I Bjerkreim; A Kolbenstvedt
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1983-02

8.  Anatomy of the femoral neck and head, with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese.

Authors:  F T Hoaglund; W D Low
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1980-10       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  The Frank Stinchfield Award: Morphologic features of the acetabulum and femur: anteversion angle and implant positioning.

Authors:  M Maruyama; J R Feinberg; W N Capello; J A D'Antonio
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Anthropometric study of the hip joint in northeastern region population with computed tomography scan.

Authors:  K C Saikia; S K Bhuyan; R Rongphar
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.251

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.