Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background: The standard commercially available marketed prostheses sometimes may not be the best ft to Indian patients because of the large anatomic variation. Orthopedic surgeons always stress the need for a proper implant-patient match in hip joint replacements, in particular, for a cementless femoral stem. The complications of mismatch are aseptic loosening, improper load distribution, and discomfort. The present study was undertaken to compare the differences in dimensions between femurs of elderly Indians and those of populations from other regions in order to solve the problem of a possible geometric mismatch between a selected implant and the hip joint as far as Indian patients are concerned.

Materials and Methods: Measurements were made using computer aided design techniques on computed tomography (CT) scanned images of 98 femurs (56 left and 42 right). The software used to convert the CT images into solid models was MIMICS® (Materialize, Inc., Leuven, Belgium). The geometrical parameters, viz., the femoral head offset, femoral head center (HC), femoral head diameter, femoral head relative position, position of shaft isthmus, neck-shaft angle, bow angle, femoral neck length, canal fare index, femoral length, and canal width at various locations, were chosen to design best-fit standard femoral stems for cementless insertion. These data were compared with the published data of other countries.

Results: A difference of 16.8% was found in the femoral head offset between Indian and Swiss populations, which can affect soft tissue tension and range of motion. At a distance of 20 mm above the lesser trochanter (LT), the anteroposterior (AP) canal width was found to differ by 45.4%, when compared with a French population which can affect the mechanical stability of femoral stem. Femoral dimensions of Indian male and female subjects have also been compared and differences evaluated. At the LT, the aspect ratio (ratio of mediolateral canal width and AP canal width) in case of males (1.198) is approximately13% higher than that of females (1.059).

Conclusions: This study indicates a need for redesign of femoral stems. The obtained anthropometric femoral dimensions can be used to design and develop indigenous hip joint prosthesis in India. The results of this study can also be used in forensic anthropometric studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Amstutz HC. Complications of total hip replacement. Clin Orthop 1970;72:123–37.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gomez PF, Morcuende JA. Early attempts at hip arthroplasty—1700s to 1950s. Iowa Orthop J 2005;25:25–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Granger C, Schutte HD, Bigger SB, Kennedy JM, Latour RA. Failure analysis of composite femoral component for hip arthoplasty. J Rehab Res Develop 2003;40:131–46.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Engh CA. Hip arthroplasty with a Moore prosthesis with porous coating: A five year study. Clin Orthop 1983;176:52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Husmann O, Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, de Roguin B, Argenson JN. Three-dimensional morphology of the proximal femur. J Arthroplasty 1987;12:444–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Engh CA, Bobyn JD, Glassman AH. Porous-coated hip replacement: The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg 1987;69:45–55.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Morscher E. Cementless total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1983;181:76–91.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Jasty M, Henshaw PM, O’Connor DO. Strain alterations in the proximal femur with an uncemented femoral prosthesis emphasizing the effect of component fix. Atlanta, GA: Proc Orthopaedic Research Society meeting; 1988. p. 335.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Najjar EI, McWilliams ER. Forensic anthropology: The structure, Morphology and variations of human bone and dentition, Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas; 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ericksen MF. Ageing changes in the medullary cavity of the proximal femur in American black and whites. Am J Phys Anthropol 1979;51:563–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Nurzenski MK, Briffa NK, Price RI, Khoo BC, Devine A, Beck TJ, et al. Geometric indices of bone strength are associated with physical activity and dietary calcium intake in healthy older women. J Bone Miner Res 2007;22:416–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Siwach RC, Dahiya S. Anthropometric study of proximal femur geometry and its clinical application. Indian J Orthop 2003;37:247–51.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Reddy VS, Moorthy GV, Reddy SG. Do we need a special design of femoral component of total hip prosthesis in our patients? Indian J Orthop 1999;33:282–4.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Leung K, Procter P, Robioneck B, Behrens K. Geometric mismatch of the gamma nail to the Chinese femur. Clin Orthop 1996;323:42–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Leung KS. Early experience with gamma nails in the treatment of peritrochanteric fractures. Trans Hong Kong Orthop Assoc 1989;33. Available from: http://www.ijoonline.com/text.asp? [Last accessed on 2011 Apr 20].

  16. Leung KS, So WS, Shen WY, Hui PW. Gamma nails and dynamic hip screws for peritrochanteric fractures. J Bone Joint Surg 1992;74:345–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Yoshioka Y, Siu D, Cooke TD. The anatomy and functional axes of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987;69:873–80.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Maruyama M, Feinberg JR, Capello WN, D’Antonio JA. Morphological features of the acetabulum and femur, anteversion angle and implant positioning. Clin Ortho Rel Res 2001;393:52–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Vaidya SV, Ranawat CS, Aroojis A, Laud NS. Anthropometric measurements to design total knee prostheses for the Indian Population. J Arthroplast 2000;15:79–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Available from: http://hipsandknees.com/hip/hipimplants.htm [Last cited on 2011 May 11].

  21. Khang G, Choi K, Kim C, Yang J, Bae T. A study of Korean femoral geometry. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2003;406:116–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubagniac JM. The morphology of the proximal femur: A three-dimensional radiographic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg 1992;74:28–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Heegaard JH. Radiological variations in the anatomical parameters of the proximal femur in relation to rotation. Fr J Orthop Surg 1989;3:121.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mahaisavariya B, Sitthiseripratip K, Tongdee T, Bohez EL, Sloten JV, Oris P. Morphological study of the proximal femur: A new method of geometrical assessment using 3-dimensional reverse engineering. Med Engg Phys 2002;24:617–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Weiner DS, Cook AJ, Hoyt WA, Oravec CE. Computed tomography in the measurement of femoral anteversion. Orthopedics 1987;1:299–306.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Luo W, Stanhope SJ, Sheehan FT. Using two palpable measurements improves the subject-specific femoral modeling. J Biomech 2009;42:2000–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Noble PC, Jerry W, Alexander JW, Lindhal LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, et al. The anatomical basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop 1988;235:148–65.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Byung WN, Kwang SS, Ki CB, Chul HC, Chul HK, Shin YK. The effect of stem alignment on results of total hip arthroplasty with a cementless tapered-wedge femoral component. J Arthroplast 2008;23:418–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hoaglund FT, Low WD. Anatomy of the femoral neck and head with comparative data Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clin Orthop 1980;152:10.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ries MD, Suzuki Y, Renowitzky G, Lotz JC, Barrack RL, Bourne RB, et al. Effect of cementless bowed stem distal surface contour and coronal slot on femoral bone strains and torsional stability. J Arthroplasty 2003;18:494–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Fessy MH, Seutin B, Bdjui J. Anatomical basis for the choice of the femoral implant in the total hip arthroplasty. Surg Radiol Anat 1997;19:283–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Hua J, Walker PS. Closeness of fit of uncemented stems improves the strain distribution in the femur. J Orthop Res 1995;13:339–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Ducheyne P, Aernoudt E, Meester PD, Martens M, Mulier JC, Leeuwen DV. Factors governing the mechanical behavior of the implant-porous coating-trabecular bone interface. J Biomech 2004;19:658–60.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Fuku H. Cementless hip prosthesis design: A basic study and analysis of the proximal femur in normal Japanese people. Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi 1994;68:763–73.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. Predicting the position of the femoral head center. J Arthroplasty 1999;14:102–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Ranawat CS, Rodriguez JA. Functional leg-lenth inequality following total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1997;12:359–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Maheshwari AV, Zlowodzki MP, Siram G, Jain AK. Femoral neck anteversion, acetabular anteversion and combined anteversion in the normal Indian adult population: A computed tomographic study. Indian J Orthop 2010;44:277–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Jain AK, Maheshwari AV, Nath S, Singh MP, Nagar M. Anteversion of the femoral neck in Indian dry femora. J Orthop Sci 2003;8:334–40.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

    Rajesh Malhotra

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, New Delhi, India

    B. R. Rawal, Rahul Ribeiro & Naresh Bhatnagar

Authors
  1. B. R. Rawal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rahul Ribeiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rajesh Malhotra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Naresh Bhatnagar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. R. Rawal.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rawal, B.R., Ribeiro, R., Malhotra, R. et al. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. IJOO 46, 46–53 (2012). https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.91634

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.91634

Key words

Search

Navigation