Literature DB >> 20725817

Comparison of femoral morphology and bone mineral density between femoral neck fractures and trochanteric fractures.

Yuki Maeda1, Nobuhiko Sugano, Masanobu Saito, Kazuo Yonenobu.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many studies that analyzed bone mineral density (BMD) and skeletal factors of hip fractures were based on uncalibrated radiographs or dual-energy xray absorptiometry (DXA). QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Spatial accuracy in measuring BMD and morphologic features of the femur with DXA is limited. This study investigated differences in BMD and morphologic features of the femur between two types of hip fractures using quantitative computed tomography (QCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty patients with hip fractures with normal contralateral hips were selected for this study between 2003 and 2007 (trochanteric fracture, n=18; femoral neck fracture, n=22). Each patient underwent QCT of the bilateral femora using a calibration phantom. Using images of the intact contralateral femur, BMD measurements were made at the point of minimum femoral-neck cross-sectional area, middle of the intertrochanteric region, and center of the femoral head. QCT images also were used to measure morphologic features of the hip, including hip axis length, femoral neck axis length, neck-shaft angle, neck width, head offset, anteversion of the femoral neck, and cortical index at the femoral isthmus.
RESULTS: No significant differences were found in trabecular BMD between groups in those three regions. Patients with trochanteric fractures showed a smaller neck shaft angle and smaller cortical index at the femoral canal isthmus compared with patients with femoral neck fractures.
CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that severe osteoporosis with thinner cortical bone of the femoral diaphysis is seen more often in patients with trochanteric fracture than in patients with femoral neck fracture. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, prognostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20725817      PMCID: PMC3032853          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1529-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  32 in total

1.  Bone mineral density in the proximal femur and hip fracture type in the elderly.

Authors:  N Nakamura; T Kyou; K Takaoka; K Ohzono; K Ono
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1992-07       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Volumetric quantitative computed tomography of the proximal femur: precision and relation to bone strength.

Authors:  T F Lang; J H Keyak; M W Heitz; P Augat; Y Lu; A Mathur; H K Genant
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.398

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

Review 4.  Are the etiologies of cervical and trochanteric hip fractures different?

Authors:  C A Mautalen; E M Vega; T A Einhorn
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1996-03       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Patients with femoral neck and intertrochanteric fractures. Are they the same?

Authors:  K J Koval; G B Aharonoff; A S Rokito; T Lyon; J D Zuckerman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry.

Authors:  X G Cheng; G Lowet; S Boonen; P H Nicholson; P Brys; J Nijs; J Dequeker
Journal:  Bone       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 4.398

7.  Bone mineral density in patients with cervical and trochanteric fractures of the proximal femur.

Authors:  E Vega; C Mautalen; H Gómez; A Garrido; L Melo; A O Sahores
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 4.507

8.  Simple measurement of femoral geometry predicts hip fracture: the study of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  K G Faulkner; S R Cummings; D Black; L Palermo; C C Glüer; H K Genant
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 6.741

9.  Meta-analysis of how well measures of bone mineral density predict occurrence of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  D Marshall; O Johnell; H Wedel
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-05-18

10.  Measurement of femoral geometry in type I and type II osteoporosis: differences in hip axis length consistent with heterogeneity in the pathogenesis of osteoporotic fractures.

Authors:  S Boonen; R Koutri; J Dequeker; J Aerssens; G Lowet; J Nijs; G Verbeke; E Lesaffre; P Geusens
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 6.741

View more
  14 in total

1.  Spatial Differences in the Distribution of Bone Between Femoral Neck and Trochanteric Fractures.

Authors:  Aihong Yu; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Ling Wang; Thomas F Lang; Yongbin Su; Xinbao Wu; Manyi Wang; Jie Wei; Chen Yi; Xiaoguang Cheng
Journal:  J Bone Miner Res       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 6.741

2.  Automated segmentation of an intensity calibration phantom in clinical CT images using a convolutional neural network.

Authors:  Keisuke Uemura; Yoshito Otake; Masaki Takao; Mazen Soufi; Akihiro Kawasaki; Nobuhiko Sugano; Yoshinobu Sato
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Proximal femoral nail antirotation against dynamic hip screw for unstable trochanteric fractures; a prospective randomized comparison.

Authors:  Sinan Zehir; R Zehir; Sultan Zehir; İ Azboy; N Haykir
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 3.693

4.  Trends in the incidence of hip fractures.

Authors:  K Senohradski; L Markovic-Denic; A Lesic; V Bumbasirevic; M Bumbasirevic
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 4.507

5.  The Proximal Femoral Bone Geometry in Plain Radiographs.

Authors:  David Grevenstein; Boris Vidovic; Christoph Baltin; Peer Eysel; Christian Karl Spies; Frank Unglaub; Johannes Oppermann
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2020-11

6.  Correlation between Parameters of Calcaneal Quantitative Ultrasound and Hip Structural Analysis in Osteoporotic Fracture Patients.

Authors:  Licheng Zhang; Houchen Lv; Hailiang Zheng; Ming Li; Pengbin Yin; Ye Peng; Yuan Gao; Lihai Zhang; Peifu Tang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Do we need orthogeriatrics in Poland? Changes in the age structure and location of hip fractures.

Authors:  Robert Wilk; Michał Skrzypek; Małgorzata Kowalska; Damian Kusz; Bogdan Koczy; Piotr Zagórski; Wojciech Pluskiewicz
Journal:  Aging Clin Exp Res       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 3.636

8.  CT-based analysis of muscle volume and degeneration of gluteus medius in patients with unilateral hip osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Takako Momose; Yutaka Inaba; Hyonmin Choe; Naomi Kobayashi; Taro Tezuka; Tomoyuki Saito
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 2.362

9.  Proximal Femoral Geometry as Fracture Risk Factor in Female Patients with Osteoporotic Hip Fracture.

Authors:  Jun Han; Myung Hoon Hahn
Journal:  J Bone Metab       Date:  2016-08-31

10.  Cortical thickness in the intertrochanteric region may be relevant to hip fracture type.

Authors:  Huafeng Zhuang; Yizhong Li; Jinkuang Lin; Donglu Cai; Siqing Cai; Lisheng Yan; Xuedong Yao
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.