Functional and anatomic orientation of the femoral head

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 469, Issue 9, 2011, Pages 2583-2589

  Wright, David ^a   Whyne, Cari ^a   Hardisty, Michael ^a   Kreder, Hans J ^a   Lubovsky, Omri ^a  

^a SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGED; ANATOMICAL VARIATION; ANTHROPOMETRY; ARTICLE; BONE DENSITY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FEMUR HEAD; FUNCTIONAL ANATOMY; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; GEOMETRY; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; JOINT MOBILITY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANGE OF MOTION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SEX DIFFERENCE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; BIOMECHANICS; CANADA; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; JOINT CHARACTERISTICS AND FUNCTIONS; METHODOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; SPIRAL COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; WEIGHT BEARING;

AGED; BIOMECHANICS; BONE DENSITY; FEMALE; FEMUR HEAD; HUMANS; MALE; ONTARIO; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SEX FACTORS; TOMOGRAPHY, SPIRAL COMPUTED; WEIGHT-BEARING;

EID: 80053332290     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1754-1     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Bergmann G, Deuretzbacher G, Heller M, Graichen F, Rohlmann A, Strauss J, Duda GN. Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. J Biomech. 2001;34:859-871. (Pubitemid 32530054)
2. Cheng XG, Lowet G, Boonen S, Nicholson PH, Brys P, Nijs J, Dequeker J. Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry. Bone. 1997;20:213-218. (Pubitemid 27141832)
3. Dalstra M, Huiskes R. Load transfer across the pelvic bone. J Biomech. 1995;28:715-724.
4. Dewire P, Simkin PA. Subchondral plate thickness reflects tensile stress in the primate acetabulum. J Orthop Res. 1996;14:838-841. (Pubitemid 26376532)
5. Gray H, Pick TP, Howden R. Anatomy: Descriptive and Surgical. Philadelphia, PA: Running Press; 1974.
6. Grynpas MD, Alpert B, Katz I, Lieberman I, Pritzker KP. Sub-chondral bone in osteoarthritis. Calcif Tissue Int. 1991;49:20-26.
7. Hoaglund FT, Low WD. Anatomy of the femoral neck and head, with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;152:10-16. (Pubitemid 11199811)
8. Ito M, Wakao N, Hida T, Matsui Y, Abe Y, Aoyagi K, Uetani M, Harada A. Analysis of hip geometry by clinical CT for the assessment of hip fracture risk in elderly Japanese women. Bone. 2010;46:453-457.
9. Johnston JD, Masri BA, Wilson DR. Computed tomography topographic mapping of subchondral density (CT-TOMASD) in osteoarthritic and normal knees: methodological development and preliminary findings. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2009;17: 1319-1326.
10. Kim JS, Park TS, Park SB, Kim JS, Kim IY, Kim SI. Measure-ment of femoral neck anteversion in 3D. Part 1: 3D imaging method. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2000;38:603-609. (Pubitemid 32051143)
11. Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK, Song EK, Yoon TR. 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC system. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2006;44:895-906. (Pubitemid 44530561)
12. Lubovsky O, Wright D, Hardisty M, Kiss A, Kreder HJ, Whyne C. Importance of the dome and posterior wall as evidenced by bone density mapping in the acetabulum. Clin Biomech. 2010. doi:10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2010.11.002.
13. Maruyama M, Feinberg JR, Capello WN, D'Antonio JA. The Frank Stinchfield Award. Morphologic features of the acetabulum and femur: anteversion angle and implant positioning. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;393:52-65. (Pubitemid 33101697)
14. Muller-Gerbl M, Putz R, Hodapp N, Schulte E, Wimmer B. Computed tomography-osteoabsorptiometry for assessing the density distribution of subchondral bone as a measure of long-term mechanical adaptation in individual joints. Skeletal Radiol. 1989;18:507-512. (Pubitemid 19271293)
15. Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22:610-614. (Pubitemid 28433796)
16. Tonnis D, Heinecke A. Acetabular and femoral anteversion: relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:1747-1770.
17. Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:876-885.
18. Wedge JH, Munkacsi I, Loback D. Anteversion of the femur and idiopathic osteoarthrosis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71:1040-1043. (Pubitemid 19215061)