蒙古族人群股骨近端解剖参数X线测量

doi:10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2024.1.03

中国临床解剖学杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (1): 11-16.doi: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2024.1.03

蒙古族人群股骨近端解剖参数X线测量

李佳伟^1#，张静^2#，李灿然³，兰文杰¹，籍庆余¹，郭志勇¹
张云凤⁴，刘启¹，陈清威¹*，李筱贺³*

1.内蒙古科技大学包头医学院第二附属医院影像中心，内蒙古包头 014030； 2.包头市肿瘤医院，内蒙古包头 014030； 3.内蒙古医科大学人体解剖教研室，呼和浩特 010000； 4.内蒙古医科大学第二附属医院影像科，呼和浩特 010000

收稿日期:2022-11-11 出版日期:2024-01-25 发布日期:2024-01-30
通讯作者: 李佳伟（1988-），男，内蒙古包头人，在读硕士，主治医师，主要从事骨与关节基础及临床研究，E-mail：593526977@qq.com；并列第一作者：张静（1988-），女，内蒙古包头人，硕士研究生，主管药师，主要从事骨关节疼痛研究，E-mail：yjszhangjing@163.com
作者简介:李筱贺，教授，博士生导师，E-mail：798242742@qq.com；陈清威，副主任医师，硕士研究生导师，E-mail：qingwei.chen@163.com
基金资助:
包头医学院秦文斌科技教育基金（BYJJ-QWB202220）；内蒙古自然科学基金（2020MS08124）；内蒙古自治区高等学校科学技术研究项目(NJZY22080)

X-ray measurement of proximal femur anatomical parameters in Mongolian population

Li Jiawei^1#, Zhang Jing^2#, Li Canran³, Lan Wenjie¹, Ji Qingyu¹, Guo Zhiyong¹, Zhang Yunfeng⁴, Liu Qi¹, Chen Qingwei¹*, Li Xiaohe³*

1. Department of Imaging, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Baotou Medical College, Inner Mongolia University of Science & Technology, Baotou 014030, China; 2. Baotou Cancer Hospital, Baotou 014030, China; 3. Department of Human Anatomy, Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohhot 010010, China; 4. Department of Imaging, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Inner Mongolia Medical University, Hohhot 010000, China

Received:2022-11-11 Online:2024-01-25 Published:2024-01-30

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的测量蒙古族人群股骨近端形态参数，为假体设计、改进及术前选择提供参考。方法随机抽取内蒙古自治区三所三级医院331例蒙古族人群的股骨X线片资料，其中男性152例，女性179例。利用华海PACS系统测量股骨头直径、股骨头偏心距、股骨颈干角、小转子中点层面髓腔内径（T0）、小转子中点上20 mm层面髓腔内径（T+20）、小转子中点下20 mm层面髓腔内径（T-20）、峡部髓腔内径，计算股骨髓腔开放指数（canal flare index，CFI）、干骺端髓腔开放指数（metaphyseal canal flare index，MCFI）。利用SPSS25.0分析各解剖参数不同性别间的差异及与年龄的相关性，并比较蒙古族人群股骨近端参数与国内外地区间的差异。结果性别间比较，MCFI均值女性偏大，颈干角、CFI性别间差异无统计学意义，其余参数则男性偏大；T-20及峡部层面髓腔内径与年龄正相关，CFI、MCFI与年龄负相关，其余参数与年龄无相关性；蒙古族人群股骨近端解剖参数与国内外人群均存在一定差异，与南方人群比较，蒙古族人群股骨头直径、股骨头偏心距、T0、T+20、T-20及峡部层面髓腔内径较大，颈干角、CFI及MCFI偏小。结论蒙古族人群相较南方人群拥有更大的股骨头直径、股骨头偏心距、更大的股骨近端髓腔内径、更小的颈干角及CFI、MCFI，假体选择及设计应考虑不同地区、民族间的差异。

关键词: , 蒙古族, , , 华南, , , 性别, , , X线, , , 股骨近段形态测量

Abstract: Objective To measure the morphological parameters of the proximal femur in Mongolian population and to provide reference for prosthesis design, improvement and preoperative prosthesis selection. Methods A total of 331 mongolian patients who received femur radiographs in the three tertiary hospitals were randomly selected, including 152 males, and 179 females. Huahai PACS system was used to measure femoral head diameter (FHD), femoral offset (FO), femoral neck shaft Angle (FNSA), medullary transverse diameter at the lesser trochanter (T0), Medullary transverse diameter at the 20 mm above lesser trochanter (T+20), medullary transverse diameter at the 20 mm below lesser trochanter (T-20), medullary transverse diameter of isthmus, canal flare index (CFI) and metaphyseal canal flare index (MCFI). SPSS25.0 was used to analyze the gender differences of these parameters and their correlation with age, and the differences between the femoral parameters of the Mongolian population and domestic and foreign regions were mainly compared. Results (1) The MCFI was larger in females, and there were no significant differences in FNSA and CFI between genders, while the other result of parameters were larger in males. (2) The inner diameter of the medullary cavity at T-20 level and isthmus level was positively correlated with age, CFI and MCFI were negatively correlated with age, and the other parameters were not correlated with age. (3) The anatomical parameters of proximal femur in Mongolian population were different from those in different regions at home and abroad. Compared with the southern population in China, the FHD, FO, the inner diameter of the medullary cavity at T0 level, T+20 level, T-20 level and isthmus level were larger in Mongolian population, while the FNSA, CFI and MCFI were smaller. Conclusions Compared with the southern population, the Mongolian population had larger FHD, FO, wider inner diameter of the proximal femoral medulla cavity, smaller FNSA, CFI and MCFI. Preoperative selection and design of prostheses should take into account the differences between different regions and nationalities.

Key words: Inner Mongolia, , , South China, , , Gender, , , X-ray, , , Morphology of the proximal femur

中图分类号:

R322.7

李佳伟, 张静, 李灿然, 兰文杰, 籍庆余, 郭志勇, 张云凤, 刘启, 陈清威, 李筱贺. 蒙古族人群股骨近端解剖参数X线测量[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 11-16.

Li Jiawei, Zhang Jing, Li Canran, Lan Wenjie, Ji Qingyu, Guo Zhiyong, Zhang Yunfeng, Liu Qi, Chen Qingwei, Li Xiaohe. X-ray measurement of proximal femur anatomical parameters in Mongolian population [J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Anatomy, 2024, 42(1): 11-16.

参考文献 29

[1]	Ferguson RJ, Palmer AJ, Taylor A, et al. Hip replacement[J]. Lancet, 2018, 392(10158): 1662-1671. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31777-X.
[2]	Claßen T, Scheid C, Landgraeber S, et al. Characteristics of elective hip replacement in the elderly[J]. Orthopade, 2017, 46(1): 25-33. DOI: 10.1007/s00132-016-3364-4.
[3]	Faizan A, Gerges JJ, Asencio G, et al. Changes in femoral version during implantation of anatomic stems: implications on stem design[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2016, 31(2): 512-516. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.09.008.
[4]	Mahmood SS, Mukka SS, Crnalic S, et al. Association between changes in global femoral offset after total hip arthroplasty and function, quality of life, and abductor muscle strength. A prospective cohort study of 222 patients[J]. Acta Orthop, 2016, 87(1): 36-41. DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2015.1091955.
[5]	Casper DS, Kim GK, Parvizi J, et al. Morphology of the proximal femur differs widely with age and sex: relevance to design and selection of femoral prostheses[J]. J Orthop Res, 2012, 30(7): 1162-1166. DOI: 10.1002/jor.22052.
[6]	Mokrovic H, Komen S, Gulan L, et al. Radiographic analysis of the proximal femoral anatomy in the Croatian population[J]. Int Orthop, 2021, 45(4): 923-929. DOI: 10.1007/s00264-021-04942-5.
[7]	丁悦, 刘尚礼, 马若凡, 等. 国人股骨假体设计的解剖学基础[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2003(4): 341-343. DOI: 10.13418/j.issn.1001-165x.2003.04.016.
[8]	张洋, 王健, 李郅涵, 等. 与关节置换相关的华南地区健康成人髋关节形态测量[J]. 中国矫形外科杂志, 2013, 21(13): 1328-1333. DOI: 10.3977/j.issn.1005-8478.2013.13.13.
[9]	白波, 董伟强. 中国华南地区髋关节的测量参数及临床意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2004(6): 592-595. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-165X.2004.06.009.
[10]	皮益刚, 赵耀超, 王万春, 等. 500例湖南地区股骨近端形态样本测量分析[J]. 中南大学学报(医学版), 2013, 38(9): 925-930. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-7347.2013.09.010.
[11]	章晓云, 陈跃平, 曹桢斌, 等. 广西地区壮族人群正常髋关节形态学研究[J].中国骨质疏松杂志, 2015, 21(11): 1351-1356, 1365. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1006-7108.2015.011.012.
[12]	Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, et al. The anatomic basis of femoral component design[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1988, (235): 148-165. PMID: 3416522.
[13]	刘力铭, 雷凯, 范华全, 等. 股骨颈干角在前后位X线平片与CT三维重建图像上的差异性研究[J]. 第三军医大学学报, 2020, 42(21): 2134-2140. DOI: 10.16016/j.1000-5404.202006166.
[14]	Kim JM, Hong SH, Kim JM, et al. Femoral shaft bowing in the coronal plane has more significant effect on the coronal alignment of TKA than proximal or distal variations of femoral shape[J]. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc, 2015, 23(7): 1936-1942. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-014-3006-5.
[15]	Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E, et al. The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stems: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2000, 15(1): 93-101. DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(00)91337-8.
[16]	Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, et al. The morphology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radiographic analysis[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1992, 74(1): 28-32. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.74B1.1732260.
[17]	Monti L, Cristofolini L, Viceconti M. Methods for quantitative analysis of the primary stability in uncemented hip prostheses[J]. Artif Organs, 1999, 23(9): 851-859. DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1594.1999.06287.x.
[18]	李建新, 刘梅. 我国少数民族人口现状及变化特点[J]. 西北民族研究, 2019(4): 120-137. DOI: 10.16486/j.cnki.62-1035/d.20191203.012.
[19]	李咏兰, 郑连斌. 中国人群的体部指数[J]. 人类学学报, 2022, 41(5): 848-861. DOI: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/aas.2021.0059.
[20]	Tarasevicius S, Kesteris U, Robertsson O, et al. Femoral head diameter affects the revision rate in total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 1,720 hip replacements with 9-21 years of follow-up[J]. Acta Orthop, 2006, 77(5): 706-709. DOI: 10.1080/17453670610012872.
[21]	Amlie E, Høvik Ø, Reikerås O. Dislocation after total hip arthroplasty with 28 and 32-mm femoral head[J]. J Orthop Traumatol, 2010, 11(2): 111-115. DOI: 10.1007/s10195-010-0097-8.
[22]	Tsikandylakis G, Kärrholm J, Hailer NP, et al. No Increase in survival for 36-mm versus 32-mm femoral heads in metal-on-polyethylene THA: a registry study[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 2018, 476(12): 2367-2378. DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000508.
[23]	Heckmann N, Ihn H, Stefl M, et al. Early results from the american joint replacement registry: a comparison with other national registries[J]. J Arthroplasty, 2019, 34(7S): S125-S134.e1. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.12.027.
[24]	Clement ND, S Patrick-Patel R, MacDonald D, et al. Total hip replacement: increasing femoral offset improves functional outcome[J]. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 2016, 136(9): 1317-1323. DOI: 10.1007/s00402-016-2527-4.
[25]	Lecerf G, Fessy MH, Philippot R, et al. Femoral offset: anatomical concept, definition, assessment, implications for preoperative templating and hip arthroplasty[J]. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2009, 95(3): 210-219. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2009.03.010.
[26]	McGrory BJ, Morrey BF, Cahalan TD, et al. Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty[J]. J Bone Joint Surg Br, 1995, 77(6): 865-869. PMID: 7593096.
[27]	Charles MN, Bourne RB, Davey JR, et al. Soft-tissue balancing of the hip: the role of femoral offset restoration[J]. Instr Course Lect, 2005, (54): 131-141. PMID: 15948440.
[28]	Bachour F, Marchetti E, Bocquet D, et al. Radiographic preoperative templating of extra-offset cemented THA implants: how reliable is it and how does it affect survival[J]? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res, 2010, 96(7): 760-768. DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2010.05.004.
[29]	Noble PC, Box GG, Kamaric E, et al. The effect of aging on the shape of the proximal femur[J]. Clin Orthop Relat Res, 1995, (316): 31-44. PMID: 7634721.

蒙古族人群股骨近端解剖参数X线测量

X-ray measurement of proximal femur anatomical parameters in Mongolian population

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 29

相关文章 15

Metrics

本文评价

推荐阅读 0

[1]	江剑宏, 段仁鹏, 李晓锋. 国人胆道三维重建解剖变异应用研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 1-4.
[2]	郭红志, 王瑜, 张加琪, 梁海彬, 马梓玮, 冯伟, 吴忧, 司子燚. 血管铸型结合CT三维模型评估先兆子痫胎盘血管结构[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 5-10.
[3]	李琨, 张燕, 郭冉, 郝咪咪, 吴轩宇, 徐艺芳, 王超群, 马文童, 张灵淇, 杨宏宇, 李志军, 张少杰, 王星. 儿童及青少年枕颈角与后枕颈角数字化测量及其临床意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 17-20.
[4]	李文, 杨思艺, 黄蕾, 卿霁雯, 蒋松涛, 张磊. 基于MRI探讨Lisfranc韧带的形态学特点及临床意义[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 21-25.
[5]	李凡凡, 徐阳, 王晓旭. 紫草素调节Nrf2/HO-1信号通路对实验性大鼠肉芽肿性小叶性乳腺炎的治疗作用研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 26-32.
[6]	王兴航, 丁佳媛, 李放, 包翠芬, 阎丽菁. 人参皂苷Rg1通过抑制NLRP3炎症小体途径减轻氧糖剥夺/复供后小胶质细胞炎症反应[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 33-41.
[7]	程莹莹, 武建军, 蔡海燕, 焦旭文, 马江波, 丁银秀. 体外炎性诱导星形胶质细胞激活及功能分析[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 42-46.
[8]	祁志, 杨力, 贾秋叶, 陈浩伦, 段兆达, 吴春云. 依达拉奉经MAPKs通路对脂多糖激活的小胶质细胞Sirt3表达调控[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 47-53.
[9]	张晶晶, 王洪新. 黄芩苷通过PDGF/P38 MAPK信号通路对肺动脉高压大鼠的保护作用[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 54-58.
[10]	乐钦, 陈荣丽, 熊婧熙, 王婷怡, 蔡志恒, 易秋实, 曾心怡. 白芨多糖对大鼠跨区皮瓣choke区的影响[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 59-64.
[11]	李笑予, 张磊, 付磊, 李东波, 汪国友. 三步接骨法治疗Sanders Ⅱ型跟骨骨折的有限元研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 65-70.
[12]	吴研飞, 马剑雄, 卢斌, 王颖, 柏豪豪, 靳洪震, 马信龙. CT后处理技术重建CT值与终板抗压强度的相关性研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 71-76.
[13]	庄万强, 唐毅, 骆勇刚, 张辉. 关节镜联合胫骨高位截骨术对髌骨位置及髌股关节功能影响的早中期回顾性研究[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 77-82.
[14]	罗鹰, 窦伟誉, 吴小杭, 陈璟昆, 彭昌贵, 潘剑英 . 微创海马钢板内固定治疗跟骨骨折并发症的影响因素[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 83-88.
[15]	陈俊臣, 曹文英, 罗燕君, 何婉仪, 朱真真, 彭志强. 抽吸取栓术与抽吸结合支架取栓术治疗脑前循环栓塞疗效比较[J]. 中国临床解剖学杂志, 2024, 42(1): 89-93.