Optimal implant alignment is important for total hip replacement (THR) longevity. Femoral stem anteversion is influenced by the native femoral anteversion. Knowing a patient’s femoral morphology is therefore important when planning optimal THR alignment. We investigated variation in femoral anteversion across a patient population requiring THR.
Methods:
Preoperatively, native femoral neck anteversion was measured from 3-dimensional CT reconstructions in 1215 patients.
Results:
The median femoral anteversion was 14.4° (−27.1–54.5°, IQR 7.4–20.9°). There were significant gender differences (males 12.7°, females 16.0°; p < 0.0001). Femoral anteversion in males decreased significantly with increasing age. 14% of patients had extreme anteversion (<0° or >30°).
Conclusions:
This is the largest series investigating native femoral anteversion in a THR population. Patient variation was large and was similar to published findings of a non-THR population. Gender and age-related differences were observed. Native femoral anteversion is patient-specific and should be considered when planning THR.
MalikAMaheshwariADorrLD.Impingement with total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am2007; 89: 1832–1842.
2.
BargarWLJamaliAANejadAH.Femoral anteversion in THA and its lack of correlation with native acetabular anteversion. Clin Orthop Relat Res2010; 468: 527–532.
3.
EmersonRHJr.Increased anteversion of press-fit femoral stems compared with anatomic femur. Clin Orthop Relat Res2012; 470: 477–481.
4.
SuhKTKangJHRohHL, et al. True femoral anteversion during primary total hip arthroplasty: use of postoperative computed tomography-based sections. J Arthroplasty2006; 21: 599–605.
5.
ImaiHMiyawakiJKamadaT, et al. Preoperative planning and postoperative evaluation of total hip arthroplasty that takes combined anteversion. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol2016; 26: 493–500.
6.
KoernerJDPatelNMYoonRS, et al. Femoral version of the general population: does” “normal” vary by gender or ethnicity?J Orthop Trauma2013; 27: 308–311.
7.
HartelMJPetersikASchmidtA, et al. Determination of femoral neck angle and torsion angle utilizing a novel three-dimensional modeling and analytical technology based on CT datasets. PLoS One2016; 11: e0149480.
8.
DimitriouDTsaiTYYueB, et al. Side-to-side variation in normal femoral morphology: 3D CT analysis of 122 femurs. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2016; 102: 91–97.
9.
BotserIBOzoudeGCMartinDE, et al. Femoral anteversion in the hip: comparison of measurement by computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and physical examination. Arthroscopy2012; 28: 619–627.
10.
MarelEWalterLenSolomonMichael, et al. Patient-specific acetabular cup orientation in functional positions using musculoskeletal modelling: a pre-operative planning tool. Orthop Proc2016; 98-B(Suppl. 3): 19.
11.
HuppertzALembckeASarialiel-H, et al. Low dose computed tomography for 3d planning of total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of radiation exposure and image quality. J Comput Assist Tomogr2015; 39: 649–656.
12.
ShandsARJrSteeleMK.Torsion of the femur; a follow-up report on the use of the Dunlap method for its determination. J Bone Joint Surg Am1958; 40: 803–816.
13.
FabryGMacEwenGDShandsARJr.Torsion of the femur. A follow-up study in normal and abnormal conditions. J Bone Joint Surg Am1973; 55: 1726–1738.
14.
CibulkaMT.Determination and significance of femoral neck anteversion. Phys Ther2004; 84: 550–558.
15.
BoymansTAVeldmanHDNoblePC, et al. The femoral head center shifts in a mediocaudal direction during aging. J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 581–586.
16.
DorrLDMalikADastaneM, et al. Combined anteversion technique for total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res2009; 467: 119–127.
17.
HisatomeTDoiH.Theoretically optimum position of the prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty to fulfill the severe range of motion criteria due to neck impingement. J Orthop Sci2011; 16: 229–237.
18.
KhanujaHSVakilJJGoddardMS, et al. Cementless femoral fixation in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2011; 93: 500–509.
19.
DorrLDWanZMalikA, et al. A comparison of surgeon estimation and computed tomographic measurement of femoral component anteversion in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2009; 91: 2598–2604.
20.
WoernerMSendtnerESpringorumR, et al. Visual intraoperative estimation of cup and stem position is not reliable in minimally invasive hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop2016; 87: 225–230.
21.
HirataMNakashimaYOhishiM, et al. Surgeon error in performing intraoperative estimation of stem anteversion in cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2013; 28: 1648–1653.
22.
HirataMNakashimaYHaraD, et al. Optimal anterior femoral offset for functional range of motion in total hip arthroplasty–a computer simulation study. Int Orthop2015; 39: 645–651.
23.
AkiyamaKNakataKKitadaM, et al. Changes in axial alignment of the ipsilateral hip and knee after total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J2016; 98-B: 349–358.
24.
GirardJKrantzNBocquetD, et al. Femoral head to neck offset after hip resurfacing is critical for range of motion. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)2012; 27: 165–169.
25.
SarialiEMauprivezRKhiamiF, et al. Accuracy of the preoperative planning for cementless total hip arthroplasty. A randomised comparison between three-dimensional computerised planning and conventional templating. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2012; 98: 151–158.
26.
WorlicekMWeberM1ZemanF, et al. Digital planning software fails to reflect stem torsion on plain radiographs after total hip arthroplasty. Rofo2016; 188: 763–767.
27.
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. United Nations, New York, 2008, p.4.
28.
National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Ionizing radiation exposure of the population of the United States. ISBN 978-0-929600-987–. NCRP Report No. 160, 2009. Bethsada, MD: NRCP Publications.
29.
UemuraKTakaoM2SakaiT, et al. The Validity of using the posterior condylar line as a rotational reference for the femur. J Arthroplasty2016; 31: 302–306.
30.
PierrepontJStambouzouCTophamM, et al. Is the distal femur the ideal reference for femoral stem anteversion? An investigation into combined functional alignment in THR. Orthop Proc2016; 98-B(Suppl. 10): 50.
31.
LazennecJYPourAEBrussonA, et al. Anatomic anteversion of the femoral neck measured in patients during total hip arthroplasty does not predict the functional anteversion of the femur in an upright position: prospective study using EOS. Orthop Proc2013; 95-B(Suppl. 34): 390.
32.
UemuraKTakaoMOtakeY, et al. Can anatomic measurements of stem anteversion angle be considered as the functional anteversion angle?J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 595–600.
33.
UemuraKTakaoMHamadaH, et al. Change in axial rotation of the femur in the resting supine position following total hip arthroplasty. Artif Organs2018; 42: 290–296.
