Submitted:
24 May 2024
Posted:
27 May 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bao, Z.; Qiao, L.; Qin, J.; Xu, J.; Zhou, S.; Chen, D.; Shi, D.; Dai, J.; Yao, Y.; Jiang, Q.; et al. The assessment of femoral shaft morphology in the sagittal plane in Chinese patients with osteoarthritis-a radiographic analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 2017, 12, 127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ko, J.H.; Han, C.D.; Shin, K.H.; Nguku, L.; Yang, I.H.; Lee, W.S.; Kim, K.I.; Park, K.K. Femur bowing could be a risk factor for implant flexion in conventional total knee arthroplasty and notching in navigated total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016, 24, 2476–2482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Akamatsu, Y.; Kobayashi, H.; Kusayama, Y.; Kumagai, K.; Saito, T. Femoral shaft bowing in the coronal and sagittal planes on reconstructed computed tomography in women with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis: a comparison with radiograph and its predictive factors. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2016, 136, 1227–1232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hyodo, K.; Nishino, T.; Kamada, H.; Nozawa, D.; Mishima, H.; Yamazaki, M. Location of fractures and the characteristics of patients with atypical femoral fractures: analyses of 38 Japanese cases. J Bone Miner Metab 2017, 35, 209–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yau, W.P.; Chiu, K.Y.; Tang, W.M.; Ng, T.P. Coronal bowing of the femur and tibia in Chinese: its incidence and effects on total knee arthroplasty planning. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2007, 15, 32–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Park, Y.C.; Song, H.K.; Zheng, X.L.; Yang, K.H. Intramedullary nailing for atypical femoral fracture with excessive anterolateral bowing. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017, 99, 726–735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Soh, H.H.; Chua, I.T.; Kwek, E.B. Atypical fractures of the femur: effect of anterolateral bowing of the femur on fracture location. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2015, 135, 1485–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Buford, W.L., Jr.; Turnbow, B.J.; Gugala, Z.; Lindsey, R.W. Three-dimensional computed tomography-based modeling of sagittal cadaveric femoral bowing and implications for intramedullary nailing. J Orthop Trauma 2014, 28, 10–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chon, C.S.; Kang, B.; Kim, H.S.; Jung, G.H. Implications of three-dimensional modeling of the proximal femur for cephalomedullary nailing: an Asian cadaver study. Injury 2017, 48, 2060–2067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thiesen, D.M.; Prange, F.; Berger-Groch, J.; Ntalos, D.; Petersik, A.; Hofstätter, B.; Rueger, J.M.; Klatte, T.O.; Hartel, M.J. Femoral antecurvation-A 3D CT Analysis of 1232 adult femurs. PLOS ONE 2018, 13, e0204961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kong, G.M.; Kwak, J.M.; Jung, G.H. Eliminating projection error of measuring Pauwels’ angle in the femur neck fractures by CT plane manipulation. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2020, 106, 607–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.W.; Jang, J.H.; Jung, G.H. Assessment of osseous corridor for transiliac-transsacral screws and clinical applications: computational simulation study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2020, 106, 863–867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Uusi-Rasi, K.; Semanick, L.M.; Zanchetta, J.R.; Bogado, C.E.; Eriksen, E.F.; Sato, M.; Beck, T.J. Effects of teriparatide [rhPTH (1–34)] treatment on structural geometry of the proximal femur in elderly osteoporotic women. Bone 2005, 36, 948–958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bonnick, S.L.; Beck, T.J.; Cosman, F.; Hochberg, M.C.; Wang, H.; de Papp, A.E. DXA-based hip structural analysis of once-weekly bisphosphonate-treated postmenopausal women with low bone mass. Osteoporos Int 2009, 20, 911–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ito, M.; Sone, T.; Fukunaga, M. Effect of minodronic acid hydrate on hip geometry in Japanese women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Metab 2010, 28, 334–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Osterhoff, G.; Morgan, E.F.; Shefelbine, S.J.; Karim, L.; McNamara, L.M.; Augat, P. Bone mechanical properties and changes with osteoporosis. Injury 2016, 47, Suppl–2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Şİmşek, M.; Bozkurt, M. Clinical significance of the relationship between 3D analysis of the distal femur and femoral shaft anatomy in total knee arthroplasty. Anatomy 2019, 13, 174–182. [Google Scholar]
- Maratt, J.; Schilling, P.L.; Holcombe, S.; Dougherty, R.; Murphy, R.; Wang, S.C.; Goulet, J.A. Variation in the femoral bow: a novel high-throughput analysis of 3922 femurs on cross-sectional imaging. J Orthop Trauma 2014, 28, 6–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sugama, R.; Minoda, Y.; Kobayashi, A.; Iwaki, H.; Ikebuchi, M.; Hashimoto, Y.; Takaoka, K.; Nakamura, H. Sagittal alignment of the lower extremity while standing in female. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2011, 19, 74–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, J.; Hou, Y.; Li, R.; Ke, Y.; Li, Z.; Lin, J. The accelerometer-based navigation system demonstrated superior radiological outcomes in restoring mechanical alignment and component sagittal positioning in total knee arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2021, 22, 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koenen, P.; Ates, D.M.; Pfeiffer, T.R.; Bouillon, B.; Bäthis, H. Femoral flexion position is a highly variable factor in total knee arthroplasty: an analysis of 593 conventionally aligned total knee replacements. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2020, 28, 1014–1022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Maderbacher, G.; Schaumburger, J.; Baier, C.; Zeman, F.; Springorum, H.R.; Birkenbach, A.M.; Grifka, J.; Keshmiri, A. Appropriate sagittal femoral component alignment cannot be ensured by intramedullary alignment rods. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2016, 24, 2453–2460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chung, B.J.; Kang, Y.G.; Chang, C.B.; Kim, S.J.; Kim, T.K. Differences between sagittal femoral mechanical and distal reference axes should be considered in navigated TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2009, 467, 2403–2413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Seo, J.G.; Kim, B.K.; Moon, Y.W.; Kim, J.H.; Yoon, B.H.; Ahn, T.K.; Lee, D.H. Bony landmarks for determining the mechanical axis of the femur in the sagittal plane during total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg 2009, 1, 128–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bolognesi, M.; Hofmann, A. Computer navigation versus standard instrumentation for TKA: a single-surgeon experience. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005, 440, 162–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pornrattanamaneewong, C.; Ruangsomboon, P.; Wingprawat, K.; Chareancholvanich, K.; Narkbunnam, R. Accuracy of empirical distal femoral valgus cut angle of 4 degrees to 6 degrees in total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2022, 32, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]








| Total (68) | Male (35) | Female (33) | p-value | |
| Age (years) | 69.1 (range, 33–93, SD: 13.97) | 69.1 (range, 33–93, SD 13.97) | 69.1 (range, 33–93, SD 13.97) | 0.059 |
| FSB_no (19) | 19 | 14 | 5 | |
| FSB_coronal1 (7) | 22 | 1 | 6 | 0.006 (χ2 = 7.624*) |
| FSB_sagittal2 (27) | 42 | 15 | 12 | 0.419 |
| FSB_both3 (15) | 15 | 5 | 10 | 0.020 (χ2 = 9.784*) |
| Lateral bowing (°)4 | 3.71 (range, 0.0–10.1, SD: 2.71) | 2.37 (range, 0.0–7.5, SD: 2.05) | 5.14 (range, 0.5–10.1, SD: 2.63) | 0.000 |
| Anterior bowing (°)5 | 11.82 (range, 4.5–18.5, SD: 2.97) | 11.17 (range, 5.7–15.4, SD: 2.62) | 12.50 (range, 4.5–18.5, SD: 3.20) | 0.065 |
| Coronal alignment (°)6 | 6.40 (range, 1.98–11.17, SD: 2.14) | 5.61 (range, 1.98–9.37, SD: 1.84) | 7.24 (range, 2.15–11.17, SD: 2.16) | 0.001 |
| Sagittal alignment (°)7 | 2.66 (range, -1.24–7.35, SD: 2.06). | 2.16 (range, -1.24–5.31, SD: 1.60) | 3.18 (range, -1.24–7.35, SD: 2.06). | 0.044 |
| Diameter_BM5 (mm)8 | 1501.6 (range, 979.6–2515.8, SD: 317.70) | 1567.1 (range, 1139.5–2515.8, SD: 339.41) | 1432.3 (range, 979.6–2083.9, SD: 281.56) | 0.080 |
| Younger group (28) | Older group (40) | p-value | |
| FSB_No | 15 | 4 | |
| FSB_coronal | 3 | 19 | 0.001 (χ2 = 10.184) |
| FSB_sagittal | 13 | 29 | 0.027 (χ2 = 4.741) |
| FSB_both | 3 | 12 | 0.000 (χ2 = 19.059) |
| Lateral bowing (°) | 2.02 (range, 0.0–5.3, SD: 1.59) | 4.90 (range, 0.3–10.1, SD: 2.72) | 0.000 |
| Anterior bowing (°) | 10.60 (range, 5.7–15.4, SD: 2.50) | 12.67 (range, 4.5–18.5, SD: 3.01) | 0.003 |
| Coronal alignment (°) | 5.22 (range, 1.98–8.61, SD: 5.22) | 7.23 (range, 2.15–11.17, SD: 2.15) | 0.000 |
| Sagittal alignment (°) | 1.90 (range, -1.24–5.64, SD: 1.66) | 3.19 (range, -0.62–7.35, SD: 2.17). | 0.007 |
| Diameter_BM (mm) | 1601.8 (range, 1015.2–2515.8, SD: 365.0) | 1431.6 (range, 979.6–2083.9, SD: 262.58) | 0.040 |
| Group I (14) | Group II (14) | Group III (21) | Group IV (19) | p-value | |
| FSB_no† | 8 | 7 | 2 | 2 | |
| FSB_coronal | 1 | 2 | 10 | 9 | 0.016 (χ2 = 10.347) |
| FSB_sagittal | 6 | 7 | 15 | 14 | 0.178 |
| FSB_both | 1 | 2 | 6 | 6 | 0.021 (χ2 = 19.498) |
| Lateral bowing (°) | 1.47 ± 1.40 | 2.57 ± 1.62 | 4.82 ± 3.02 | 4.98 ± 2.43 | 0.000 |
| Anterior bowing (°) | 10.34 ± 2.53 | 10.84 ± 2.53 | 12.49 ± 2.81 | 12.86 ± 3.29 | 0.035 |
| Coronal alignment (°) | 5.10 ± 1.38 | 5.39 ± 1.66 | 7.04 ± 2.34 | 7.43 ± 1.97 | 0.001 |
| Sagittal alignment (°) | 1.59 ± 1.51 | 2.21 ± 1.81 | 3.20 ± 2.28 | 3.18 ± 2.10 | 0.068 |
| Diameter_BM (mm) | 1713.3 ± 399.50 | 1490.3 ± 300.49 | 1416.7 ± 258.451 | 1448.0 ± 273.22 | 0.037 |
| Lateral bowing | Anterior bowing | Coronal alignment | Sagittal alignment | Diameter of BM | |
| Lateral bowing | 1 | ||||
| Anterior bowing | 0.288* | 1 | |||
| Coronal alignment | 0.816** | 0.303* | 1 | ||
| Sagittal alignment | 0.326* | 0.758** | 0.400** | 1 | |
| Diameter of BM | 0.254* | 0.604** | 0.143 | 0.306* | 1 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).