header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

THREE-DIMENSIONAL RECONSTRUCTION AND MEASUREMENT OF THE PROXIMAL FEMUR IN ADULT DEVELOPMENTAL DYSPLASIA OF THE HIP

The International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA), 28th Annual Congress, 2015. PART 4.



Abstract

Objective

To three-dimensionally reconstruct the proximal femur of DDH (Developmental dysplasia of the hip) and measure the related anatomic parameters, so that we could have a further understanding of the morphological variation of the proximal femur of DDH, which would help in the preoperative planning and prosthesis design specific for DDH.

Methods

From Jan.2012 to Dec.2014, 38 patients (47 hips) of DDH were admitted and 30 volunteers (30 hips) were selected as controls. All hips from both groups were examined by CT scan and radiographs. The Crowe classification method was applied. The CT data were imported into Mimics 17.0. The three-dimensional models of the proximal femur were then reconstructed, and the following parameters were measured: neck-shaft angle, neck length, offset, height of the centre of femoral head, height of the isthmus, height of greater trochanter, the medullary canal diameter of isthmus(Di), the medullary canal diameter 10mm above the apex of the lesser trochanter(DT+10), the medullary canal diameter 20mm below the apex of the lesser trochanter(DT-20), and then DT+10/Di, DT-20/Di and DT+10/DT-20 were calculated.

Results

There is no significant difference in neck-shaft angle between Crowe I-III DDH and the control group, while the neck-shaft angle is much smaller in Crowe IV DDH. The neck length of Crowe IV DDH is much smaller than those of Crowe I-III DDH. As for Di there is neither significant difference between Crowe I DDH and the control group, nor significant difference between CroweII-III and Crowe IV, but the difference is significant between the first two groups and the latter two groups. DT+10/DT-20 and the offset have no significant difference between the control group and DDH groups. DT-20, DT+10, DT+10/Di and DT-20/Di are much smaller in Crowe IV DDH than that in Crowe I-III and the control groups. Height of greater trochanter in Crowe IV is larger than those in Crowe I-III and the control group. Height of the centre of femoral head in Crowe IV DDH is smaller than those in Crowe I-III DDH and the control group. The height of the isthmus in Crowe IV is much smaller than those in Crowe I-III DDH and the control group.

Conclusion

The neck-shaft angle in DDH groups is not larger than that in the control group, while in contrast, it's much smaller in Crowe IV DDH than that in the control group. Comparing to Crowe I-III DDH and the control group, Crowe IV DDH has a dramatic change in the intramedullary and extramedullary parameters. The isthmus and the great trochanter are higher and there is apparent narrowing of the medullary canal around the level of the lesser trochanter.


*Email: