SpringerLink
Log in

Strong correlation between the morphology of the proximal femur and the geometry of the distal femoral trochlea

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

Previous investigations suggested that the geometry of the proximal femur may be related to osteoarthritis of the tibiofemoral joint and various patellofemoral joint conditions. This study aims to investigate the correlation between proximal and distal femoral geometry. Such a correlation could aid our understanding of patient complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and be of benefit for further development of kinematic approaches in TKA.

Methods

CT scans of 60 subjects (30 males, 30 females) were used to identify anatomical landmarks to calculate anatomical parameters of the femur, including the femoral neck anteversion angle, neck–shaft angle (NSA), mediolateral offset (ML-offset), condylar twist angle (CTA), trochlear sulcus angle (TSA) and medial/lateral trochlear inclination angles (MTIA/LTIA). Correlation analyses were carried out to assess the relationship between these parameters, and the effect of gender was investigated.

Results

The CTA, TSA and LTIA showed no correlation with any proximal parameter. The MTIA was correlated with all three proximal parameters, mostly with the NSA and ML-offset. Per 5° increase in NSA, the MTIA was 2.1° lower (p < 0.01), and for every 5 mm increase in ML-offset, there was a 2.6° increase in MTIA (p < 0.01). These results were strongest and statistically significant in females and not in males and were independent of length and weight.

Conclusions

Proximal femoral geometry is distinctively linked with trochlear morphology. In order to improve knowledge on the physiological kinematics of the knee joint and to improve the concept of kinematic knee replacement, the proximal femur seems to be a factor of clinical importance.

Level of evidence

III.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. National Joint Registry (2013) 10th annual report 2013. National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern-Ireland

  2. Bargar WL, Jamali AA, Nejad AH (2010) Femoral anteversion in THA and its lack of correlation with native acetabular anteversion. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(2):527–532

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boissonneault A, Lynch JA, Wise BL, Segal NA, Gross KD, Murray DW, Nevitt MC, Pandit HG (2014) Association of hip and pelvic geometry with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis: Multicenter Osteoarthritis Study (MOST). Osteoarthr Cartil 22(8):1129–1135

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bonett DG, Wright TA (2000) Sample size requirements for estimating Pearson Kendall and Spearman correlations. Psychometrika 65(1):23–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Cherian JJ, Kapadia BH, Banerjee S, Jauregui JJ, Issa K, Mont MA (2014) Mechanical, anatomical, and kinematic axis in TKA: concepts and practical applications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 7(2):89–95

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Djuric M, Milovanovic P, Djonic D, Minic A, Hahn M (2012) Morphological characteristics of the develo** proximal femur: a biomechanical perspective. Srp Arh Celok Lek 140(11–12):738–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Dossett HG, Swartz GJ, Estrada NA, LeFevre GW, Kwasman BG (2012) Kinematically versus mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics 35(2):e160–e169

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Eckhoff DG, Bach JM, Spitzer VM, Reinig KD, Bagur MM, Baldini TH, Flannery NM (2005) Three-dimensional mechanics, kinematics, and morphology of the knee viewed in virtual reality. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(Suppl 2):71–80

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Eckhoff DG, Kramer RC, Alongi CA, VanGerven DP (1994) Femoral anteversion and arthritis of the knee. J Pediatr Orthop 14(5):608–610

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Eckhoff DG, Montgomery WK, Kilcoyne RF, Stamm ER (1994) Femoral morphometry and anterior knee pain. Clin Orthop Relat Res 302:64–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hapa O, Muratli HH, Cakici H, Gulcek S, Aksahin E, Bicimoglu A (2009) Is there a relation between hip torsion, coverage and osteoarthritis of the knee? J Child Orthop 3(1):27–31

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hollister AM, Jatana S, Singh AK, Sullivan WW, Lupichuk AG (1993) The axes of rotation of the knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res 290:259–268

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hoshino Y, Wang JH, Lorenz S, Fu FH, Tashman S (2012) The effect of distal femur bony morphology on in vivo knee translational and rotational kinematics. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20(7):1331–1338

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Howell SM, Howell SJ, Kuznik KT, Cohen J, Hull ML (2013) Does a kinematically aligned total knee arthroplasty restore function without failure regardless of alignment category? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471(3):1000–1007

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kapandji IA (2010) The physiology of the joints. Volume 2, The lower limb. Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kessler O, Durselen L, Banks S, Mannel H, Marin F (2007) Sagittal curvature of total knee replacements predicts in vivo kinematics. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 22(1):52–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee TQ, Anzel SH, Bennett KA, Pang D, Kim WC (1994) The influence of fixed rotational deformities of the femur on the patellofemoral contact pressures in human cadaver knees. Clin Orthop Relat Res 302:69–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK, Song EK, Yoon TR (2006) 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC system. Med Biol Eng Comput 44(10):895–906

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Maruyama M, Feinberg JR, Capello WN, D’Antonio JA (2001) The Frank Stinchfield Award: morphologic features of the acetabulum and femur: anteversion angle and implant positioning. Clin Orthop Relat Res 393:52–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ollivier M, Parratte S, Lecoz L, Flecher X, Argenson JN (2013) Relation between lower extremity alignment and proximal femur anatomy. Parameters during total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 99(5):493–500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Parratte S, Blanc G, Boussemart T, Ollivier M, Le Corroller T, Argenson JN (2013) Rotation in total knee arthroplasty: no difference between patient-specific and conventional instrumentation. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21(10):2213–2219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Paternostre F, Schwab PE, Thienpont E (2014) The combined Whiteside’s and posterior condylar line as a reliable reference to describe axial distal femoral anatomy in patient-specific instrument planning. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-00014-02836-00165

    Google Scholar 

  23. Prevrhal S, Fox JC, Shepherd JA, Genant HK (2003) Accuracy of CT-based thickness measurement of thin structures: modeling of limited spatial resolution in all three dimensions. Med Phys 30(1):1–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Reikeras O (1992) Patellofemoral characteristics in patients with increased femoral anteversion. Skeletal Radiol 21(5):311–313

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN, Esteve P, de Roguin B (1992) The morphology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radiographic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74(1):28–32

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Staubli HU, Durrenmatt U, Porcellini B, Rauschning W (1999) Anatomy and surface geometry of the patellofemoral joint in the axial plane. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81(3):452–458

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Stefanik JJ, Roemer FW, Zumwalt AC, Zhu Y, Gross KD, Lynch JA, Frey-Law LA, Lewis CE, Guermazi A, Powers CM, Felson DT (2012) Association between measures of trochlear morphology and structural features of patellofemoral joint osteoarthritis on MRI: the MOST study. J Orthop Res 30(1):1–8

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E (1998) A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion. J Comput Assist Tomogr 22(4):610–614

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Takai S, Sakakida K, Yamashita F, Suzu F, Izuta F (1985) Rotational alignment of the lower limb in osteoarthritis of the knee. Int Orthop 9(3):209–215

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Thienpont E, Schwab PE, Paternostre F, Koch P (2014) Rotational alignment of the distal femur: anthropometric measurements with CT-based patient-specific instruments planning show high variability of the posterior condylar angle. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-00014-03086-00162

    Google Scholar 

  31. Van Haver A, De Roo K, De Beule M, Van Cauter S, Audenaert E, Claessens T, Verdonk P (2013) Semi-automated landmark-based 3D analysis reveals new morphometric characteristics in the trochlear dysplastic femur. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. doi:10.1007/s00167-00013-02573-00161

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Victor J (2009) Rotational alignment of the distal femur: a literature review. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95(5):365–372

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Weidow J, Mars I, Karrholm J (2005) Medial and lateral osteoarthritis of the knee is related to variations of hip and pelvic anatomy. Osteoarthr Cartil 13(6):471–477

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yoshino N, Takai S, Ohtsuki Y, Hirasawa Y (2001) Computed tomography measurement of the surgical and clinical transepicondylar axis of the distal femur in osteoarthritic knees. J Arthroplasty 16(4):493–497

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Yoshioka Y, Cooke TD (1987) Femoral anteversion: assessment based on function axes. J Orthop Res 5(1):86–91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Yoshioka Y, Siu D, Cooke TD (1987) The anatomy and functional axes of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Am 69(6):873–880

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This project was enabled due to the granting of a Special Experience Award by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers and funding from the University of Bath.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Centre for Orthopaedic Biomechanics, University of Bath, Bath, BA2 7AY, UK

    Samantha J. Wright & Anthony W. Miles

  2. Atrium Medical Centre, AHORSE Foundation, Heerlen, The Netherlands

    Tim A. E. J. Boymans & Bernd Grimm

  3. Centre for Orthopaedics and Sport, Zurich, Switzerland

    Oliver Kessler

Authors
  1. Samantha J. Wright
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tim A. E. J. Boymans
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Bernd Grimm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anthony W. Miles
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Oliver Kessler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samantha J. Wright.

Additional information

Samantha J. Wright and Tim A. E. J. Boymans are joint first authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wright, S.J., Boymans, T.A.E.J., Grimm, B. et al. Strong correlation between the morphology of the proximal femur and the geometry of the distal femoral trochlea. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22, 2900–2910 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3343-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3343-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation