Advertisement

Variation of three-dimensional femoral bowing and its relation to physical status and bone mineral density: a study with CT

  • Hiroshi Shimosawa
  • Takeo NaguraEmail author
  • Kengo Harato
  • Shu Kobayashi
  • Masaya Nakamura
  • Morio Matsumoto
  • Yasuo Niki
Original Article
  • 12 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

Anatomically, the femoral bone shows sagittal and coronal bowing. Pronounced bowing would affect femoral implant surgery accuracy, but factors associated with degrees of three-dimensional (3D) femoral bowing have not yet been identified. This study measured 3D femoral bowing and examined the correlation between 3D femoral bowing and risk factors.

Methods

3D femoral bone models of unaffected legs from 125 patients were reconstructed from computed tomography data. A trans-epicondylar axis (TEA)-based coordinate system was introduced into bone models and the reproducibility of this coordinate system was evaluated. The cross-sectional contours of the femoral canal were extracted along the vertical axis of the TEA-based coordinate system, and the angles of 3D femoral bowing were examined.

Results

The reproducibility to set the coordinate was very high. Total, sagittal, and coronal femoral bowing were 8.9 ± 1.8°, 8.7 ± 1.8°, and 0.1 ± 1.9°, respectively. There was no significant difference in the degrees of femoral bowing between males and females. Total, coronal, and sagittal femoral bowing correlated with age, height, and femoral length, but only femoral coronal bowing correlated with bone mineral density (BMD) of the femur and lumbar spine.

Conclusions

We introduced a highly reproducible method for measuring femoral sagittal and coronal bowing by constructing a femoral 3D coordinate system. Anterior femoral bowing was the dominant direction of bowing in our Japanese cohort, whereas the degree of lateral bowing correlated with age, height, femoral length, and BMD. Our results suggest that lateral femoral bowing could increase with aging and decreasing BMD.

Keywords

3D femoral bowing Computed tomography Femoral coordinate system Bone mineral density 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Drs. Hiroyuki Enomoto, Takayuki Nakamura, and Yoshimori Kiriyama for advice and help with this study.

Author contributions

HS performed data analysis, manuscript writing, and management. TN, KH, SK, MN, MM, and YN contributed to the conception and design of the study. All the authors were involved in drafting the article.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Abdelaal AH, Yamamoto N, Hayashi K, Takeuchi A, Morsy AF, Miwa S, Kajino Y, Rubio DA, Tsuchiya H (2016) Radiological assessment of the femoral bowing in Japanese population. SICOT J 22:2–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chang CB, Choi JY, Koh IJ, Seo ES, Seong SC, Kim TK (2010) What should be considered in using standard knee radiographs to estimate mechanical alignment of the knee? Osteoarthr Cartil 18:530–538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dimitriou D, Tsai TY, Yue B, Rubash HE, Kwon YM, Li G (2016) Side-to-side variation in normal femoral morphology: 3D CT analysis of 122 femurs. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 102:91–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Egol KA, Chang EY, Cvitkovic J, Kummer FJ, Koval KJ (2004) Mismatch of current intramedullary nails with the anterior bow of the femur. J Orthop Trauma 18:410–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Im GI, Kwon OJ, Kim CH (2014) The relationship between osteoarthritis of the knee and bone mineral density of proximal femur: a cross-sectional study from a Korean population in women. Clin Orthop Surg 6:420–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jiang CC, Insall JN (1989) Effect of rotation on the axial alignment of the femur. Pitfalls in the use of femoral intramedullary guides in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:50–56Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Khanal L, Shah S, Koirala S (2017) Estimation of total length of femur from its proximal and distal segmental measurements of disarticulated femur bones of Nepalese population using regression equation Method. J Clin Diagn Res 11(3):1–5Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karakaş HM, Harma A (2008) Femoral shaft bowing with age: a digital radiological study of Anatolian Caucasian adults. Diagn Interv Radiol 14:29–32Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kingsley PC, Olmsted KL (1948) A study to determine the angle of anteversion of the neck of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am 30A:745–751CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lasam MP, Lee KJ, Chang CB, Kang YG, Kim TK (2013) Femoral lateral bowing and varus condylar orientation are prevalent and affect axial alignment of TKA in Koreans. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:1472–1483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li YR, Gao YH, Qi X, Liu JG, Ding L, Yang C, Zhang Z, Li SQ (2017) Analysis of factors that affect the precision of the radiographic lateral femoral bowing angle using a three-dimensional computed tomography-based modelling technique. J Orthop Surg Res 14(12):92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maratt J, Schilling PL, Holcombe S, Dougherty R, Murphy R, Wang SC, Goulet JA (2014) Variation in the femoral bow: a novel high-throughput analysis of 3922 femurs on cross-sectional imaging. J Orthop Trauma 28:6–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsumoto T, Hashimura M, Takayama K, Ishida K, Kawakami Y, Matsuzaki T, Nakano N, Matsushita T, Kuroda R, Kurosaka M (2015) A radiographic analysis of alignment of the lower extremities—initiation and progression of varus-type knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthr Cartil 23:217–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mochizuki T, Tanifuji O, Koga Y, Sato T, Kobayashi K, Nishino K, Watanabe S, Ariumi A, Fujii T, Yamagiwa H, Omori G, Endo N (2017) Sex differences in femoral deformity determined using three-dimensional assessment for osteoarthritic knees. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 25:468–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Park JH, Lee Y, Shon OJ, Shon HC, Kim JW (2016) Surgical tips of intramedullary nailing in severely bowed femurs in atypical femur fractures: simulation with 3D printed model. Injury 47:1318–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sato T, Koga Y, Omori G (2004) Three-dimensional lower extremity alignment assessment system: application to evaluation of component position after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19:620–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sebastian AS, Wilke BK, Taunton MJ, Trousdale RT (2014) Femoral bow predicts postoperative malalignment in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 29:1605–1609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Skyttä ET, Haapamäki V, Koivikko M, Huhtala H, Remes V (2011) Reliability of the hip-to-ankle radiograph in determining the knee and implant alignment after total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 77:329–335Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tetreault MW, Shukla SK, Yi PH, Sporer SM, Della Valle CJ (2014) Are short fully coated stems adequate for “simple” femoral revisions? Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:577–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wade SW, Strader C, Fitzpatrick LA, Anthony MS, O’Malley CD (2014) Estimating prevalence of osteoporosis: examples from industrialized countries. Arch Osteoporos 9:182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wu G, van der Helm FC, Veeger HE, Makhsous M, Van Roy P, Anglin C, Nagels J, Karduna AR, McQuade K, Wang X, Werner FW, Buchholz B (2002) Standardization and Terminology Committee of the International Society of Biomechanics. ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion—part I: ankle, hip, and spine. International Society of Biomechanics. J Biomech 35:543–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yau WP, Chiu KY, Tang WM, Ng TP (2007) Coronal bowing of the femur and tibia in Chinese: its incidence and effects on total knee arthroplasty planning. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 15:32–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yoshimura N, Muraki S, Oka H, Mabuchi A, En-Yo Y, Yoshida M, Saika A, Yoshida H, Suzuki T, Yamamoto S, Ishibashi H, Kawaguchi H, Nakamura K, Akune T (2009) Prevalence of knee osteoarthritis, lumbar spondylosis, and osteoporosis in Japanese men and women: the research on osteoarthritis/osteoporosis against disability study. J Bone Miner Metab 27:620–628CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryKeio University School of MedicineTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations