Tawada Kaneaki, Iguchi Hirotaka, Tanaka Nobuhiko, Watanabe Nobuyuki, Murakami Satona, Hasegawa Shinichi, Otsuka Takanobu
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Nagoya City University, 1 Kawasumi, Mizuho-Cho, Mizuho-Ward, Nagoya, Aichi, 467-8601, Japan,
J Orthop Sci. 2015 May;20(3):498-506. doi: 10.1007/s00776-015-0704-x. Epub 2015 Mar 5.
The canal flare index (CFI; the ratio of the diameter of the femoral canal at the isthmus in the anteroposterior (A-P) view to the diameter of the medullary canal 20 mm above the lesser trochanter) is often used as a canal characteristic. Clinically, however, CFI measurements are sometimes untrustworthy because of femoral rotation and, especially, greater anteversion among Japanese patients. Our objectives were to analyze femoral geometry, by use of 3D CAD models, to evaluate the effects of rotational error, and to seek an index less affected by rotation.
Computed axial tomography (CAT) scan data from 60 femurs were used. By use of CAD software, 3D femoral models were created. The outside of the femur and the inside canal width 20 mm (P20) and 10 mm proximal (P10), and 10 mm (D10), 20 mm (D20), 30 mm (D30), and 40 mm (D40) distal from the center of the lesser trochanter, and at the isthmus were measured for different angles of femoral rotation. CFI, FFI (femoral flare index; the ratio of the extra-cortical diameters at the same levels as for the CFI), and other canal ratios (P20/D10, P20/D20, P20/D30, and P20/D40) were then calculated and the effect of rotational errors was investigated.
Mean CFI, FFI, P20/D10, P20/D20, P20/D30, and P20/D40 were 4.29, 2.08, 2.05, 2.49, 2.85, and 3.09 in the position without rotational error. CFI was not related to anteversion but had a negative correlation with isthmus canal width (only). In contrast FFI was almost constant at approximately 2.1 for different anteversion and age. With regard to the effect of rotational error, CFI changed by 1.31, FFI by 0.40, P20/D10 by 0.41, P20/D20 by 0.40, P20/D30 by 0.59, and P20/D40 by 0.80 for a variety of rotational angles.
Outside femoral shape was little different for any person; as a result, FFI was almost constant. In contrast, CFI was revealed to be affected by canal width at the isthmus only. With regard to the effect of rotation, P20/D20 was much less affected by rotation than CFI; it could, therefore, be an appropriate index for expressing proximal canal shape.
髓腔扩张指数(CFI;前后位(A-P)视图中峡部股骨髓腔直径与小转子上方20mm处髓腔直径之比)常被用作髓腔特征。然而在临床上,由于股骨旋转,尤其是日本患者中较大的前倾角,CFI测量有时并不可靠。我们的目的是通过使用三维计算机辅助设计(3D CAD)模型分析股骨几何形状,评估旋转误差的影响,并寻找一个受旋转影响较小的指数。
使用来自60个股骨的计算机断层扫描(CAT)数据。通过使用CAD软件创建三维股骨模型。测量了股骨外侧以及距小转子中心近端10mm(P10)、20mm(P20)以及远端10mm(D10)、20mm(D20)、30mm(D30)和40mm(D40)处以及峡部的髓腔宽度,测量时股骨处于不同的旋转角度。然后计算CFI、FF I(股骨扩张指数;与CFI相同水平处的皮质外径之比)以及其他髓腔比率(P20/D10、P20/D20、P20/D30和P20/D40),并研究旋转误差的影响。
在无旋转误差的位置,平均CFI、FFI、P20/D10、P20/D20、P20/D30和P20/D40分别为4.29、2.08、2.05、2.49、2.85和3.09。CFI与前倾角无关,仅与峡部髓腔宽度呈负相关。相比之下,不同前倾角和年龄下,FFI几乎恒定在约2.1。关于旋转误差的影响,对于各种旋转角度,CFI变化1.31,FFI变化0.40,P20/D10变化0.41,P20/D20变化0.40,P20/D30变化0.59,P20/D40变化0.80。
任何人的股骨外形差异不大;因此,FFI几乎恒定。相比之下,CFI仅受峡部髓腔宽度影响。关于旋转的影响,P20/D20受旋转的影响远小于CFI;因此,它可能是表达近端髓腔形状的合适指数。