切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华关节外科杂志(电子版) ›› 2024, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (06) : 778 -784. doi: 10.3877/ cma.j.issn.1674-134X.2024.06.012

综述

异常股骨前倾角的生物力学研究进展
陈胤熹1, 李辉2,()   
  1. 1.712046 咸阳,陕西中医药大学第一临床医学院
    2.710054 西安市红会医院关节病医院综合病区
  • 收稿日期:2024-05-06 出版日期:2024-12-01
  • 通信作者: 李辉
  • 基金资助:
    陕西省自然科学基金(2018JM7049)

Research progress on biomechanics of abnormal femoral anteversion

Yinxi Chen1, Hui Li2,()   

  1. 1.The First Clinical Medical College of Shaanxi University of Chinese Medicine, Xianyang 712046, China
    2.The Comprehensive Department of the Arthropathy Hospital, Xi'anHonghui Hospital, Xi'an 710054, China
  • Received:2024-05-06 Published:2024-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Hui Li
引用本文:

陈胤熹, 李辉. 异常股骨前倾角的生物力学研究进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 778-784.

Yinxi Chen, Hui Li. Research progress on biomechanics of abnormal femoral anteversion[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Joint Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2024, 18(06): 778-784.

股骨前倾角(FA)是股骨近端相对于股骨后髁连线发生扭转/旋转所形成的角度,FA异常对下肢各关节的运动学和动力学影响巨大。个体之间FA差异较大,且测量方法尚未统一,目前研究通常认为FA正常值范围为5°至20°。异常的FA,包括股骨过度前倾和相对后倾,会改变髋关节的生物力学环境,这与髋关节发育不良、股骨髋臼撞击综合征等疾病的发生发展密切相关。异常的FA也会改变髋关节的运动模式,从而造成软骨、盂唇甚至骨的损伤,对FA的准确测量及术前评估有助于制定个性化的手术策略,从而进一步提高髋关节保护手术的疗效。

Femoral anteversion (FA) is an angle that describes the rotation or torsionof the proximal femur relative to posterior condyle line. Abnormal FA has a great influence on the kinematics and dynamics of the joints of the lower limbs.There are great differences in FA among individuals, and the measurement methods have not yet been unified. At present, the most commonly adopted normal value of FA ranges from 5°to 20°. Abnormal FA, including excessive anteversion and relative retroversion, could change the mechanical environment of the hip joint, and contribute to the occurrence and development of developmental dysplasia of hip and femoroacetabular impingement. Abnormal FA leads to alteration of the movement pattern, which could subsequently cause damage of the acetabular cartilage, labrum and even bone. Accurate measurement and meticulous evaluation of FA are helpful to formulate personalized preoperative planning, thereby further improving the efficacy of hip joint preserving operation.

图1 测量FA的不同方法示意图 注:FA的测量值因股骨颈轴线定位不同而变异较大。图中7种方法中,Weiner等人和Hernandez等人选择的股骨远端参考线为股骨内外侧髁连线(a),其余5种方法均为股骨后髁连线(b)Note: the measured values of FA vary significantly depending on the positioning of the femoral neck axis.Among the seven methods mentioned above, Weiner et al. and Hernandez et al. selected the distal femoral reference line as the line connecting the medial and lateral femoral condyles (a), while the other five methods used the line connecting the posterior femoral condyles (b)
Figure 1 Illustrationsof different methods for measuring FA
表1 基于CT测量FA的7种方法定义总结
Table 1 Definitions of the seven methods for CT-based measurement of FA
[1]
Koerner JD, Patel NM, Yoon RS, et al. Femoral version of the general population: does “normal” vary by gender or ethnicity?[J].J Orthop Trauma, 2013, 27( 6 ): 308-311.
[2]
Suzuki M, Kinoshita K, Sakamoto T, et al. Side-to-side variability in the femoral neck anteversion angle: a study of the Japanese population with osteonecrosis of the femoral head [J]. J Orthop Sci,2024, 29( 2 ): 589-595.
[3]
Kapur E, Dracic A, Gracic E. Clinical importance and sex differences of the femoral anteversion angle[J]. J Health Sci, 2019: .DOI: 10. 17532/jhsci. 2018. 545.Kapur E, Dracic A, Gracic E. Clinical importance and sex differences of the femoral anteversion angle[J/OL]. J Health Sci,2019: 1-8. DOI: 10. 17532/jhsci. 2018. 545.
[4]
Kunze KN, Alter TD, Newhouse AC, et al. Association between orientation and magnitude of femoral torsion and propensity for clinically meaningful improvement after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome: acomputed tomography analysis[J]. Am J Sports Med, 2021, 49( 9 ): 2466-2474.
[5]
Modenese L, Barzan M, Carty CP. Dependency of lower limb joint reaction forces on femoral version [J]. Gait Posture, 2021, 88:318-321.
[6]
Terjesen T, Benum P, Anda S, et al. Increased femoral anteversion and osteoarthritis of the hip joint [J]. Acta Orthop Scand, 1982, 53( 4 ): 571-575.
[7]
Tönnis D, Heinecke A. Acetabular and femoral anteversion:relationship with osteoarthritis of the hip[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am,1999, 81( 12 ): 1747-1770.
[8]
Scorcelletti M, Reeves ND, Rittweger J, et al. Femoral anteversion:significance and measurement[J]. J Anat, 2020, 237( 5 ): 811-826.
[9]
Buly RL. Editorial commentary: asimple twist of fate: the ramifications of abnormal femoral version[J]. Arthroscopy, 2021,37( 1 ): 124-127.
[10]
Ito I, Miura K, Kimura Y, et al. Differences between the Craig's test and computed tomography in measuring femoral anteversion in patients with anterior cruciate ligament injuries[J]. J Phys Ther Sci,2020, 32( 6 ): 365-369.
[11]
Schmaranzer F, Lerch TD, Siebenrock KA, et al. Differences in femoral torsion among various measurement methods increase in hips with excessive femoral torsion[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res,2019, 477( 5 ): 1073-1083.
[12]
Sugano N, Noble PC, Kamaric E. A comparison of alternative methods of measuring femoral anteversion[J]. J Comput Assist Tomogr, 1998, 22( 4 ): 610-614.
[13]
Reikerås O, Bjerkreim I, Kolbenstvedt A. Anteversion of the acetabulum and femoral neck in normals and in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip[J]. Acta Orthop Scand, 1983, 54( 1 ): 18-23.
[14]
Liodakis E, Doxastaki I, Chu K, et al. Reliability of the assessment of lower limb torsion using computed tomography: analysis of five different techniques[J]. Skeletal Radiol, 2012, 41( 3 ): 305-311.
[15]
Hernandez RJ, Tachdjian MO, Poznanski AK, et al. CT determination of femoral torsion[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1981,137( 1 ): 97-101.
[16]
Schmaranzer F, Kallini JR, Ferrer MG, et al. How common is femoral retroversion and how is it affected by different measurement methods in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis?[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2021, 479( 5 ): 947-959.
[17]
Lee YS, Oh SH, Seon JK, et al. 3D femoral neck anteversion measurements based on the posterior femoral plane in ORTHODOC system[J]. Med Biol Eng Comput, 2006, 44( 10 ): 895-906.
[18]
Murphy SB, Simon SR, Kijewski PK, et al. Femoral anteversion[J].J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1987, 69( 8 ): 1169-1176.
[19]
Weiner DS, Cook AJ, Hoyt WA Jr, et al. Computed tomography in the measurement of femoral anteversion[J]. Orthopedics, 1978, 1( 4 ):299-306.
[20]
Jarrett DY, Oliveira AM, Zou KH, et al. Axial oblique CT to assess femoral anteversion[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 2010, 194( 5 ):1230-1233.
[21]
Tomczak RJ, Guenther KP, Rieber A, et al. MR imaging measurement of the femoral antetorsional angle as a new technique:comparison with CT in children and adults[J]. AJR Am J Roentgenol, 1997, 168( 3 ): 791-794.
[22]
Elsharkawi KM, Barakat MS, Farahat AAK, et al. Role of magnetic resonance imaging in assessment of acetabular and femoral version in developmental dysplasia of the hip[J]. Radiol Bras, 2022, 55( 5 ):299-304.
[23]
Kohli A, Xia S, Wells JE, et al. Three-dimensional CT and 3D MRI of hip-important aids to hip preservation surgery[J]. Semin Ultrasound CT MR, 2023, 44( 4 ): 252-270.
[24]
Passmore E, Pandy MG, Graham HK, et al. Measuring femoral torsion in vivo using freehand 3-D ultrasound imaging[J].Ultrasound MedBiol, 2016, 42( 2 ): 619-623.
[25]
Li M, Venäläinen MS, Chandra SS, et al. Discrete element and finite element methods provide similar estimations for hip joint contact mechanics during walking gait[J/OL]. J Biomech, 2021, 115:110163. DOI: 10. 1016/j. jbiomech. 2020. 110163.
[26]
Shepherd MC, Gaffney BMM, Song K, et al. Femoral version deformities alter joint reaction forces in dysplastic hips during gait[J/OL]. J Biomech, 2022, 135: 111023. DOI: 10. 1016/j.jbiomech. 2022. 111023.
[27]
De Pieri E, Cip J, Brunner R, et al. The functional role of hip muscles during gait in patients with increased femoral anteversion[J]. Gait Posture, 2023, 100: 179-187.
[28]
Fabry G, MacEwen GD, Shands ARJr. Torsion of the femur. A follow-up study in normal and abnormal conditions[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1973, 55( 8 ): 1726-1738.
[29]
Kainz H, Wesseling M, Jonkers I. Generic scaled versus subjectspecific models for the calculation of musculoskeletal loading in cerebral palsy gait: effect of personalized musculoskeletal geometry outweighs the effect of personalized neural control[J/OL].Clin Biomech, 2021, 87: 105402. DOI: 10. 1016/j. clinbiomech.2021. 105402.
[30]
Kainz H, Mindler GT, Kranzl A. Influence of femoral anteversion angle and neck-shaft angle on muscle forces and joint loading during walking [J/OL]. PLoS One, 2023, 18( 10 ): e0291458. DOI: 10.1371/journal. pone. 0291458.
[31]
Meyer AM, Thomas-Aitken HD, Brouillette MJ, et al. Isolated changes in femoral version do not alter intra-articular contact mechanics in cadaveric hips[J/OL]. J Biomech, 2020, 109:109891. DOI: 10. 1016/j. jbiomech. 2020. 109891.
[32]
Bourget-Murray J, Taneja A, Naserkhaki S, et al. Computational modelling of hip resurfacing arthroplasty investigating the effect of femoral version on hip biomechanics[J/OL]. PLoS One, 2021, 16( 5 ): e0252435. DOI: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0252435.
[33]
Gelberman RH, Cohen MS, Shaw BA, et al. The association of femoral retroversion with slipped capital femoral epiphysis[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 1986, 68( 7 ): 1000-1007.
[34]
Piazzolla A, Solarino G, Bizzoca D, et al. Spinopelvic parameter changes and low back pain improvement due to femoral neck anteversion in patients with severe unilateral primary hip osteoarthritis undergoing total hip replacement[J]. Eur Spine J,2018, 27( 1 ): 125-134.
[35]
皮颖, 王高, 张强, 等. 年轻患者初次髋关节置换术后关节翻修的原因分析[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志( 电子版 ), 2023, 17( 3 ):430-434.
[36]
Wells J, Nepple JJ, Crook K, et al. Femoral morphology in the dysplastic hip: three-dimensional characterizations with CT [J].Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2017, 475( 4 ): 1045-1054.
[37]
Sankar WN, Novais E, Koueiter D, et al. Analysis of femoral version in patients undergoing periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia[J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2018, 26( 15 ):545-551.
[38]
Gaffney BMM, Hillen TJ, Nepple JJ, et al. Statistical shape modeling of femur shape variability in female patients with hip dysplasia[J]. J Orthop Res, 2019, 37( 3 ): 665-673.
[39]
Meier MK, Schmaranzer F, Kaim T, et al. Combined femoral and acetabular version is sex-related and differs between patients with hip dysplasia and acetabular retroversion[J/OL]. Eur J Radiol,2023, 158: 110634. DOI: 10. 1016/j. ejrad. 2022. 110634.
[40]
Thomas-Aitken HD, Goetz JE, Dibbern KN, et al. Patient age and hip morphology alter joint mechanics in computational models of patients with hip dysplasia[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2019, 477( 5 ):1235-1245.
[41]
Aitken HD, Westermann RW, Bartschat NI, et al. Chronically elevated contact stress exposure correlates with intra-articular cartilage degeneration in patients with concurrent acetabular dysplasia and femoroacetabular impingement[J]. J Orthop Res,2022, 40( 11 ): 2632-2645.
[42]
Goetz JE, Thomas-Aitken HD, Sitton SE, et al. Joint contact stress improves in dysplastic hips after periacetabular osteotomy but remains higher than in normal hips[J]. Hip Int, 2023, 33( 2 ): 298-305.
[43]
Harris MD, MacWilliams BA, Foreman KB, et al. Higher mediallydirected joint reaction forces are a characteristic of dysplastic hips: a comparative study using subject-specific musculoskeletal models[J]. J Biomech, 2017, 54: 80-87.
[44]
Contreras C, Amenábar T, Torres J, et al. Correlation between femoral version and severity of hip dysplasia in patients with advanced osteoarthritis prior to total hip arthroplasty[J]. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol, 2022, 66( 2 ): 121-127.
[45]
Chaharbakhshi EO, Hartigan DE, Perets I, et al. Is hip arthroscopy effective in patients with combined excessive femoral anteversion and borderline dysplasia? A match-controlled study[J]. AmJ Sports Med, 2019, 47( 1 ): 123-130.
[46]
Trigg SD, Schroeder JD, Hulsopple C. Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome[J]. Curr Sports MedRep, 2020, 19( 9 ):360-366.
[47]
Ganz R, Parvizi J, Beck M, et al. Femoroacetabular impingement: a cause for osteoarthritis of the hip[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2003( 417 ): 112-120.
[48]
Redmond JM, Gupta A, Dunne K, et al. What factors predict conversion to THA after arthroscopy?[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res,2017, 475( 10 ): 2538-2545.
[49]
Lerch TD, Todorski IAS, Steppacher SD, et al. Prevalence of femoral and acetabular version abnormalities in patients with symptomatic hip disease: a controlled study of 538 hips[J]. Am J Sports Med,2018, 46( 1 ): 122-134.
[50]
Spiker AM, Fields KG, Nguyen JT, et al. Characterization of version in the dysplastic hip and the need for subsequent femoral derotational osteotomy after periacetabular osteotomy[J]. J Hip Preserv Surg, 2020, 7( 3 ): 575-582.
[51]
Lerch TD, Eichelberger P, Baur H, et al. Prevalence and diagnostic accuracy of in-toeing and out-toeing of the foot for patients with abnormal femoral torsion and femoroacetabular impingement:implications for hip arthroscopy and femoral derotation osteotomy[J]. Bone Joint J, 2019, 101-B( 10 ):1218-1229.
[52]
Lerch TD, Novais EN, Schmaranzer F, et al. What is the prevalence of cam deformity after prophylactic pinning of the contralateral asymptomatic hip in unilateral slipped capital femoral epiphysis? A 10-year minimum followup study[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2019,477( 5 ): 1111-1122.
[53]
Lerch TD, Vuilleumier S, Schmaranzer F, et al. Patients with severe slipped capital femoral epiphysis treated by the modified Dunn procedure have low rates of avascular necrosis, good outcomes, and little osteoarthritis at long-term follow-up[J]. Bone Joint J, 2019,101-B( 4 ): 403-414.
[54]
Ziebarth K, Milosevic M, Lerch TD, et al. High survivorship and little osteoarthritis at 10-year followup in SCFE patients treated with a modified dunn procedure[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2017, 475( 4 ):1212-1228.
[55]
Wang CK, Cohen D, Kay J, et al. The effect of femoral and acetabular version on outcomes following hip arthroscopy: asystematic review[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2022, 104( 3 ): 271-283.
[56]
Li SJ, Huang HJ, Li CT, et al. Mechanical effect of changed femoral neck ante-version angles on the stability of an intertrochanteric fracture fixed with PFNA: a finite element analysis[J/OL]. Heliyon,2024, 10( 10 ): e31480. DOI: 10. 1016/j. heliyon. 2024. e31480.
[57]
Seo H, Naito M, Kinoshita K, et al. Clinical outcomes according to femoral and acetabular version after periacetabular osteotomy[J/OL]. JBJS Open Access, 2018, 3( 2 ): e0048. DOI: 10. 2106/JBJS. OA. 17. 00048.
[58]
Ribeiro R, Gomes E, Ferreira B, et al. Derotational distal femoral osteotomy corrects excessive femoral anteversion in patients with patellofemoral instability: a systematic review[J]. Knee Surg Sports TraumatolArthrosc, 2024, 32( 3 ): 713-724.
[59]
Buly RL, Sosa BR, Poultsides LA, et al. Femoral derotation osteotomy in adults for version abnormalities[J/OL]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg, 2018, 26( 19 ): e416-e425. DOI: 10. 5435/JAAOS-D-17-00623.
[60]
Alter TD, Fenn TW, Kaplan DJ, et al. Effect of differing orientation and magnitude of femoraltorsion on outcomes and achievement of the MCID and PASS at 5 years after hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement syndrome[J]. Am J Sports Med,2023, 51( 10 ): 2540-2550.
[61]
Vendittoli PA, Riviere C, Hirschmann MT, et al. Why personalized surgery is the future of hip and knee arthroplasty: a statement from the personalized arthroplasty society[J]. EFORT Open Rev, 2023, 8( 12 ): 874-882.
[1] 王静, 赵乐, 曾健康, 李培杰, 谭飞, 李嘉欢, 乔永杰, 周胜虎. 富血小板血浆治疗早期股骨头坏死的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 773-777.
[2] 刘涛, 樊保佑, 史仲举, 刘德荣, 王沛. 股骨距是一个容易被误解的人体结构[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 626-629.
[3] 李焕玺, 何淳诺, 田志敏, 周胜虎, 吴昊越, 张浩强. 全膝关节置换术后股骨远端假体周围骨折治疗现状[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 630-637.
[4] 郭艳波, 马亮, 李刚, 阎伟, 骆帝, 岳亮, 吴伟山. 全膝关节置换术后胫股关节脱位的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 658-671.
[5] 罗欢, 李川, 蔡兴博, 浦路桥, 孟晨, 赵庆刚, 徐永清. 臀下动脉来源的股骨头后上支持带动脉观察[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 439-444.
[6] 何甘霖, 陈香侬, 李萍, 甄佳怡, 李京霞, 邹外一, 许多荣. 白血病异基因造血干细胞移植术后股骨坏死的影响因素[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 450-456.
[7] 赵飞鸿, 陈颖杰, 林静芳, 郑晓春, 廖燕凌. 超声引导下周围神经阻滞对髋膝关节置换术后恢复的影响[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 457-468.
[8] 何淳诺, 田志敏, 李焕玺, 吴昊越, 庄凯鹏, 周胜虎, 张浩强. 小儿发育性髋关节发育不良诊治的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 497-504.
[9] 高小康, 张净宇, 刘金伟, 田东牧, 胡永成, 徐卫国. 连接型人工膝关节假体运动和负重模式的演变和进展[J/OL]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(04): 505-516.
[10] 王贝贝, 崔振义, 王静, 王晗妍, 吕红芝, 李秀婷. 老年股骨粗隆间骨折患者术后贫血预测模型的构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(06): 355-362.
[11] 张于, 程亮亮, 王峰, 赵德伟. 2枚与3枚空心钉治疗无移位股骨颈骨折的疗效对比[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 281-286.
[12] 茹江英, 廖启宇, 温国洪, 潘思华, 刘栋, 张皓琛, 牛云飞. 直接前方入路和后外侧入路半髋关节置换治疗老年痴呆股骨颈骨折的疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 287-293.
[13] 单良, 刘怡, 于涛, 徐丽. 老年股骨颈骨折术后患者心理弹性现状及影响因素分析[J/OL]. 中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 294-300.
[14] 王松雷, 张贻良, 孟浩, 宋威, 白林晨, 袁心, 张辉. 股骨前髁预截骨髓外定位技术在全膝关节置换术中的应用[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(09): 811-819.
[15] 张耕毓, 唐冲, 张昆, 张辉, 张清华, 刘家帮. 股骨头坏死髓芯减压术的文献计量学分析及单中心病例报道[J/OL]. 中华临床医师杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(08): 771-780.
阅读次数
全文


摘要