Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to make proximal femur fracture types more predictable by considering morphological features of an acetabulum as well as of a proximal femur in the Japanese population.
Methods
A retrospective review of radiographs of the proximal femoral fractures was conducted in patients registered from 2010 to 2012, dividing into patients with femoral neck fractures; Group Neck (n = 101), and patients with femoral intertrochanteric fractures; Group IT (n = 99). Intergroup comparison was conducted: age, sex, height, weight, the ratios of femoral intertrochanteric length (IT Length), femoral neck length (Neck Length), femoral neck width (Neck Width), lateral offset length (Offset) to femoral head diameter, neck–shaft angle (N–S angle), and center–edge angle of the acetabulum (C–E angle), adjusting for age. Multiple logistic regression analysis was conducted among these parameters.
Results
The Group IT showed significantly older age than the Group Neck. Greater C–E angle in Group IT was observed in the patients in their 80s and 90s years of age. The Group Neck showed greater N–S angle only in the patients in their 80s years of age. In multiple logistic regression analysis, the impact of the age and the C–E angle on the fracture types was similar (odds ratio 1.08, 1.09, respectively, p < 0.01 both).
Conclusions
Age, N–S angle, and C–E angle could be independent predictors for determining the proximal femur fracture types.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Duboeuf F, Hans D, Schott AM, Kotzki PO, Favier F, Marcelliet C (1997) Different morphometric and densitometric parameters predict cervical and trochanteric hip fracture: the EPIDOS Study. J Bone Miner Res 12:1895–1902
Ferris BD, Kennedy C, Bhamra M, Muirhead-Allwood W (1989) Morphology of the femur in proximal femoral fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 71:475–477
Gluer CC, Cummings SR, Pressman A, Li J, Gluer K, Faulkner KG, Grampp S (1994) Prediction of hip fractures from pelvic radiographs: the study of osteoporotic fractures. The Study of Osteoporotic Fractures Research Group. J Bone Miner Res 9:671–677
Gnudi S, Ripamonti C, Lisi L, Fini M, Giardino R, Giavaresi G (2002) Proximal femur geometry to detect and distinguish femoral neck fractures from trochanteric fractures in postmenopausal women. Osteoporos Int 13:69–73
Greenspan SL, Myers ER, Maitland LA, Kido TH, Krasnow MB, Hayes WC (1994) Trochanteric bone mineral density is associated with type of hip fracture in the elderly. J Bone Miner Res 9:1889–1894
Greenspan SL, Myers ER, Kiel DP, Parker RA, Hayes WC, Resnick NM (1998) Fall direction, bone mineral density, and function: risk factors for hip fracture in frail nursing home elderly. Am J Med 104:539–545
Hayes WC, Myers ER, Morris JN, Gerhart TN, Yett HS, Lipsitz LA (1993) Impact near the hip dominates fracture risk in elderly nursing home residents who fall. Calcif Tissue Int 52:192–198
Kok LM, van der Steenhoven TJ, Nelissen RG (2011) A retrospective analysis of bilateral fractures over sixteen years: localisation and variation in treatment of second hip fractures. Int Orthop 35:1545–1551
Mautalen CA, Vega EM, Einhorn TA (1996) Are the etiologies of cervical and trochanteric hip fractures different? Bone 18:133–137
Pande I, O’Neill TW, Pritchard C, Scott DL, Woolf AD (2000) Bone mineral density, hip axis length and risk of hip fracture in men: results from the Cornwall Hip Fracture Study. Osteoporos Int 11:866–870
Partanen J, Jamsa T, Jalovaara P (2001) Influence of the upper femur and pelvic geometry on the risk and type of hip fractures. J Bone Miner Res 16:1540–1546
Pulkkinen P, Partanen J, Jalovaara P, Jamsa T (2004) Combination of bone mineral density and upper femur geometry improves the prediction of hip fracture. Osteoporos Int 15:274–280
Rafferty KL (1997) Structural design of the femoral neck in primates. J Hum Evol 34:361–383
Robinovitch SN, Hayes WC, McMahon TA (1991) Prediction of femoral impact forces in falls on the hip. J Biomech Eng 113:366–374
Sawalha S, Parker MJ (2012) Characteristics and outcome in patients sustaining a second contralateral fracture of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94:102–106
Stewart A, Porter RW, Primrose WR, Walker LG, Reid DM (1999) Cervical and trochanteric hip fractures: bone mass and other parameters. Clin Rheumatol 18:201–206
Szulc P, Duboeuf F, Schott AM, Dargent-Molina P, Meunier PJ, Delmas PD (2006) Structural determinants of hip fracture in elderly women: re-analysis of the data from the EPIDOS study. Osteoporos Int 17:231–236
Acknowledgments
Each author certifies that they have no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
Each author certifies that they have no commercial associations (e.g., consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yamauchi, K., Naofumi, M., Sumida, H. et al. Comparison of morphological features in the femur between femoral neck fractures and femoral intertrochanteric fractures. Surg Radiol Anat 38, 775–780 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-016-1626-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-016-1626-9