Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

MPR realignment increases accuracy when measuring femoral neck anteversion angle

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To compare two methods of measuring femoral neck anteversion angle (FNA): A 2D method used at Odense University Hospital until 2010, and a method labeled 3D-OUH. The latter method makes corrections to compensate for errors introduced by the individual placement of patients in the CT scanner.

Materials and methods

Twenty-six CT-examined patients were included: nine men and 17 women. The right side FNA was measured twice with each method by one observer, measuring intraobserver variability. Both methods are based on the following anatomy: femoral head center, center at the level of lesser trochanter and posterior apex of the femoral condyles. The 3D-OUH method corrects for the individual orientation of femur by realigning it prior to measurement, in accordance to Murphy et al.’s original definition of FNA. The intercondylar notch center of the knee and center at lesser trochanter was used in the realignment.

Results

The 2D method significantly overestimated FNA compared to 3D-OUH by 4.2° (95 % CI: 2.8°; 5.6°), p < 0.0001. All measurements with the 3D method needed clock-wise correction in the coronal plane, suggesting patient positioning as a consistent source of overestimation by the 2D method. The 3D-OUH method had a lower intraobserver variability with a limit of agreement (LOA) of −2.4° to 2.1° against that of the 2D method of −3.4° to 3.8°

Conclusions

Mean anteversion was 4.2° (95 % CI: 2.8°; 5.6°) lower with the 3D-OUH method than with the 2D method. The 3D-OUH method eliminated an obvious source of error, namely the individual orientation of femur during CT-examination. Moreover, intraobserver variability was improved with the 3D-OUH method.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Billing L. Roentgen examination of the proximal femur end in children and adolescents. Acta Radiol Suppl. 1954;110:1–80.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Murphy SB, Simon SR, Kijewski PK, Wilkinson RH, Griscom NT. Femoral anteversion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69(8):1169–76.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hermann KL, Egund N. CT measurement of anteversion in the femoral neck–the influence of femur positioning. Acta Radiol. 1997;38:527–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 1998;22(4):610–4.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim JS, Park TS, Park SB, Kim IY, Kim SI. Measurement of femoral neck anteversion in 3D. Part1: 3D imaging method. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2000;38(6):603–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Kuo TY, Skedros JG, Bloebaum RD. Measurement of femoral anteversion by biplane radiography and computed tomography imaging: comparison with an anatomic reference. Investig Radiol. 2003;38(4):221–9.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lee YS, Oh HS, 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(10):895–906.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between measurement. Biochim Clin. 1987;11:399–404.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. Biochim Clin. 2007;17(4):571–82.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pulisetti TD, Onwochei MO, Ebraheim NA, Humphries C, Coombs RJ. Mathematical precision in rotational corrective osteotomy of the femur. J Orthop Trauma. 1998;12(5):360–2.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Tönnis D, Heinecke A. Diminished femoral antetorsion syndrome: a cause of pain and osteoarthritis. J Pediatr Orthop. 1991;11(4):419–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

For providing valuable statistical counseling, we thank Jens Lauritsen, Consultant, PhD, Accident Analysis Group, Odense University Hospital and senior statistician Oke Gerke, Ph.D, Department of Nuclear Medicine, Odense University Hospital.

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tommy Hemmert Olesen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Olesen, T.H., Torfing, T. & Overgaard, S. MPR realignment increases accuracy when measuring femoral neck anteversion angle. Skeletal Radiol 42, 1119–1125 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-013-1639-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-013-1639-y

Keywords

Navigation