The neck-shaft angle: an update on reference values and associated factors

Cornelius S Fischer, Jens-Peter Kühn, Henry Völzke, Till Ittermann, Denis Gümbel, Richard Kasch, Lyubomir Haralambiev, René Laqua, Peter Hinz, Jörn Lange, Cornelius S Fischer, Jens-Peter Kühn, Henry Völzke, Till Ittermann, Denis Gümbel, Richard Kasch, Lyubomir Haralambiev, René Laqua, Peter Hinz, Jörn Lange

Abstract

Background and purpose - The neck-shaft angle (NSA) is valuable for diagnostics and therapy of the hip, but current reference values derive mostly from studies on anatomic specimens, small cohorts, or are hospital-based. Moreover, associated factors such as age, sex, or anthropometric data have rarely been considered. Therefore, we determined associated factors for NSA and reassessed the historical reference values in a general adult population.Methods - NSAs on both sides of 3,226 volunteers from the population-based Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP) were measured with MRI. SHIP drew a representative sample of the population of Pomerania (northeastern Germany). NSAs were compared with sex, age, and anthropometric data by bivariable linear regression models. Reference values were assessed by quantile regressions for 2.5th and 97.5th percentiles.Results - The mean NSA was 127° (SD 7), while men had a lower NSA than women (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.4°-1.4°). The reference range was 114°-140°. Age was inversely associated with NSA (CI -0.2 to -0.1). Body height was positively associated with the NSA, while BMI and waist circumference showed a negative association. There was no association between body weight and NSA.Interpretation - The historical lower limit of 120° might be too high, so the radiological prevalence of hip pathology might have been overestimated. The previously reported influence of age, sex, and body height on the NSA has been confirmed.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The neck–shaft angle (x) is composed of a and b; a = femoral neck axis, b = femoral shaft axis.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The negative association between neck–shaft angle and body mass index is shown.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
The positive association between neck–shaft angle and body height is shown.

References

    1. Alonso C G, Curiel M D, Carranza F H, Cano R P, Perez A D. Femoral bone mineral density, neck–shaft angle and mean femoral neck width as predictors of hip fracture in men and women: Multicenter Project for Research in Osteoporosis. Osteoporos Int 2000; 11(8): 714–20.
    1. Anderson J Y, Trinkaus E. Patterns of sexual, bilateral and interpopulational variation in human femoral neck–shaft angles. J Anat 1998; 192(2): 279–85.
    1. Bagaria V, Deshpande S, Kuthe A, Rasalkar D D, Paunipagar B K, Madhugiri T S. Radiographic study of the hip joint to determine anthropometric parameters for Indian population. Eur J Radiol 2012. 81(2): 312–16.
    1. Beall D P, Martin H D, Mintz D N, Ly J Q, Costello R F, Braly B A, Yoosefian F. Anatomic and structural evaluation of the hip: a cross-sectional imaging technique combining anatomic and biomechanical evaluations. Clin Imaging 2008; 32(5): 372–81.
    1. Boese C K, Jostmeier J, Oppermann J, Dargel J, Chang D, Eysel P, Lechler P. The neck shaft angle: CT reference values of 800 adult hips. Skeletal Radiol 2015; 45(4): 455–63.
    1. Boese C K, Dargel J, Oppermann J, Eysel P, Scheyerer M J, Bredow J, Lechler P. The femoral neck–shaft angle on plain radiographs: a systematic review. Skeletal Radiol 2016; 45(1): 19–28.
    1. Boissonneault A, Lynch J A, Wise B L, Segal N A, Gross K D, Murray D W, Nevitt M C, Pandit H G. Association of hip and pelvic geometry with tibiofemoral osteoarthritis: multicenter osteoarthritis study (MOST). Osteoarthr Cartilage 2014; 22(8): 1129–35.
    1. Coskun Benlidayi I, Guzel R, Basaran S, Aksungur E H, Seydaoglu G. Is coxa valga a predictor for the severity of knee osteoarthritis? A cross-sectional study. Surg Radiol Anat 2015; 37(4): 369–76.
    1. Dimitriou D, Tsai T, Yue B, Rubash H E, Kwon Y, Li G. Side-to-side variation in normal femoral morphology: 3D CT analysis of 122 femurs. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2016; 102(1): 91–7.
    1. Doherty M, Courtney P, Doherty S, Jenkins W, Maciewicz R A, Muir K, Zhang W. Nonspherical femoral head shape (pistol grip deformity), neck shaft angle, and risk of hip osteoarthritis: a case-control study. Arthritis Rheum 2008; 58(10): 3172–82.
    1. Dolan M M, Heyworth B E, Bedi A, Duke G, Kelly B T. CT reveals a high incidence of osseous abnormalities in hips with labral tears. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011; 469(3): 831–8.
    1. Elbuken F, Baykara M, Ozturk C. Standardisation of the neck–shaft angle and measurement of age-, gender- and BMI-related changes in the femoral neck using DXA. Singapore Med J 2012; 53(9): 587–90.
    1. Fischer C S, Kuhn J, Ittermann T, Schmidt C, Gumbel D, Kasch R, Frank M, Laqua R, Hinz P, Lange J. What are the reference values and associated factors for center–edge angle and alpha angle? A population-based study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2018; 476(11): 2249–59.
    1. Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neck–shaft angle in humans: variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. J Anat 2013; 223(2): 133–51.
    1. Kaptoge S, Beck T J, Reeve J, Stone K L, Hillier T A, Cauley J A, Cummings S R. Prediction of incident hip fracture risk by femur geometry variables measured by hip structural analysis in the study of osteoporotic fractures. J Bone Miner Res 2008; 23(12): 1892–1904.
    1. Lequesne M, Lemoine A, Massare C. Le “complet” radiographique coxofémoral: Dépistage et bilan préopératoire des vices architecturaux de la hanche. J Radiol Electrol Med Nucl 1964; 45:27–44.
    1. Mitra A, Khadijeh B, Vida A P, Ali R N, Farzaneh M, Maryam V F, Vahid Y. Sexing based on measurements of the femoral head parameters on pelvic radiographs. J Forensic Leg Med 2014; 23: 70–5.
    1. Morvan J, Bouttier R, Mazieres B, Verrouil E, Pouchot J, Rat A, Guellec D, Guillemin F, Coste J, Saraux A. Relationship between hip dysplasia, pain, and osteoarthritis in a cohort of patients with hip symptoms. J Rheumatol 2013; 40(9): 1583–9.
    1. Nissen N, Hauge E M, Abrahamsen B, Jensen, J E B, Mosekilde L, Brixen K. Geometry of the proximal femur in relation to age and sex: a cross-sectional study in healthy adult Danes. Acta Radiol 2005; 46(5): 514–18.
    1. Srisaarn T, Salang K, Klawson B, Vipulakorn K, Chalayon O, Eamsobhana P. Surgical correction of coxa vara: evaluation of neck shaft angle, Hilgenreiner-epiphyseal angle for indication of recurrence. J Clin Orthop Trauma 2019; 10(3): 593–8.
    1. Tönnis D, Heinecke A. Acetabular and femoral anteversion: relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999; 81(12): 1747–70.
    1. Völzke H, Alte D, Schmidt C O, Radke D, Lorbeer R, Friedrich N, Aumann N, Lau K, Piontek M, Born G, Havemann C, Ittermann T, Schipf S, Haring R, Baumeister S E, Wallaschofski H, Nauck M, Frick S, Arnold A, Jünger M, Mayerle J, Kraft M, Lerch M M, Dörr M, Reffelmann T, Empen K, Felix S B, Obst A, Koch B, Gläser S, Ewert R, Fietze I, Penzel T, Dören M, Rathmann W, Haerting J, Hannemann M, Röpcke J, Schminke U, Jürgens C, Tost F, Rettig R, Kors J A, Ungerer S, Hegenscheid K, Kühn J, Kühn J, Hosten N, Puls R, Henke J, Gloger O, Teumer A, Homuth G, Völker U, Schwahn C, Holtfreter B, Polzer I, Kohlmann T, Grabe H J, Rosskopf D, Kroemer H K, Kocher T, Biffar R, John U, Hoffmann W. Cohort profile: the study of health in Pomerania. Int J Epidemiol 2011; 40(2): 294–307.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi