Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) ›› 2016, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (2): 279-282. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2016.02.018

• Article • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Estimation of femoral version based on broach geometry after femoral-neck osteotomy

LIU Jian1, LV Ming1, WU Jian1, GUO Sheng-jie1, HAN Na2, ZHOU Yi-xin1△   

  1. (1. Department of Adult Reconstruction, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100035, China; 2. Department of Traumatic Orthopedics, Peking University People’s Hospital, Beijing 100044, China)
  • Online:2016-04-18 Published:2016-04-18
  • Contact: ZHOU Yi-xin1 E-mail:orthyixin@yahoo.com

Abstract:

Objective:To find out whether it is accurate to estimate femoral version based on femoral broach after femoral neck osteotomy using computed tomography scans. Methods: In 32 total hip arthroplasty (THA), we performed CT scans before and after operation. Four possible levels (lesser trochanter, 5 mm above, 10 mm above and 15 mm above the lesser trochanter) of broach version were calculated based on the pre-operative CT scan. Stem versions were measured on the post-operative CT scan. We determined the difference between the preoperative broach version and the postoperative stem version using the Student’s t-test for paired samples assuming equal variance. Results: For the operated hips, pre-operative hip version differed according to the level of measurement. Our findings showed that the average femoral version was 37.0°±11.0° at the level of the lesser trochanter (section 1), 34.3°±10.6° at 5 mm above the lesser trochanter (section 2), 28.1°±10.9° at 10 mm above the lesser trochanter (section 3), and 22.4°±13.7° at 15 mm above the lesser trochanter (section 4), and that the average version for the femoral neck (FNV) was 12.9°±13.8°. The postoperative hip version was the stem version (FSV), which we found to be an average of 26.1°±11.0°. The mean femoral version for section 1 and 2 was larger than the mean postoperative stem version (P<0.01); the mean version for sections 3 and 4 did not differ from the mean postoperative stem version (P>0.05). The mean femoral neck version was less than the mean postoperative stem version (P<0.01); the difference was 13.2°±11.1° of the increased anteversion on average for the FSV compared with FNV. Conclusion: The accuracy of estimated femoral version after arthroplasty depends on broach level. When it is 10 mm above the lesser trochanter, stem version estimation is accurate, but below that level, there is a tendency to overestimate.

Key words: Prosthesis design, Femur neck, Acetabulum, Arthroplasty, replacement, hip, Tomography, X-ray computed

CLC Number: 

  • R687.3
[1] Lin-lin LI,Yi-jiao ZHAO,Hu CHEN,Yong WANG,Yu-chun SUN. Accuracy of intercuspal occlusion in 3D reconstruction with the dental articulator position method [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2020, 52(1): 138-143.
[2] QING Hong-kun, ZHANG Xue-min, JIANG Jing-jun, ZHANG Xiao-ming, HE Chang-shun, SUN Zhan-guo. Endovascular repair of an iliac artery aneurysm after endovascular aneurysm repair with handmade iliac branch device: a case report [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2015, 47(5): 888-890.
[3] YANG Xin, SUN Yi-Fei, TIAN Lei, SI Wen-Jie, FENG Hai-Lan, LIU Yi-Hong. Precision of digital impressions with TRIOS under simulated intraoral impression taking conditions [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2015, 47(1): 85-89.
[4] LIU Yi-hong, WANG Yong, ZHANG Qing-hui, GAO Yuan, FENG Hai-lan. Fracture reliability of zirconia all-ceramic crown according to zirconia coping design [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2014, 46(1): 71-75.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] Author. English Title Test[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2010, 42(1): 1 -10 .
[2] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(2): 188 -191 .
[3] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(3): 376 -379 .
[4] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(4): 459 -462 .
[5] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2010, 42(1): 82 -84 .
[6] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2007, 39(3): 319 -322 .
[7] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2007, 39(3): 333 -336 .
[8] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2007, 39(3): 337 -340 .
[9] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2007, 39(3): 225 -328 .
[10] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2007, 39(4): 346 -350 .