Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Aug;31(8):1842-8.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.015. Epub 2016 Feb 17.

Agreement Between Proximal Femoral Geometry and Component Design in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Implications for Implant Choice

Affiliations

Agreement Between Proximal Femoral Geometry and Component Design in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Implications for Implant Choice

Christoph K Boese et al. J Arthroplasty. 2016 Aug.

Abstract

Background: The present study aimed to analyze the agreement between proximal femoral geometry of adult hips and femoral component design in total hip arthroplasty.

Methods: Anatomical femoral offset (FOAnat) and the anatomical neck-shaft angle (NSAAnat) of 800 adult hips were measured by computed tomography scans, and anatomical femoral neck height (FHAnat) was calculated. Corresponding best-fit implants of the most common hip system (standard, high offset and varus variant) were identified for each hip. Finally, the precision of the best possible anatomic reconstruction was assessed.

Results: The mean FOAnat was 38.0 mm (range: 19.8-57.9 mm, standard deviation [SD]: 6.4 mm), the mean NSAAnat was 130.8° (range: 107.1°-151.9°; SD: 6.5°), and the mean FHAnat was 32.6 mm (range: 14.4-52.0 mm; SD: 5.5 mm). In 450 (56.3%) hips, the standard variant was identified to be the best-fit implant, followed by the varus (n = 282, 35.3%) and the high offset (n = 68, 8.5%) variants. The mean minimal distance from the best-fit implant was 4.5 mm (range: 0.1-20.2 mm, SD: 3.4 mm). Excellent agreement (distance: <2 mm) between hip anatomy and best-fit implant was found in 203 (25.4%) hips, combined excellent and acceptable agreement (distance: <6 mm) in 569 (71.1%) hips, whereas 213 (28.9%) hips were graded as poor (distance: ≥6 mm).

Conclusion: The present study revealed a mismatch between proximal femoral anatomy of a relevant proportion of adult hips and implant geometry of the most common femoral component in total hip arthroplasty.

Keywords: femoral offset; joint replacement; neck-shaft angle; preoperative templating; total hip arthroplasty.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources