Radiographic anatomy of the proximal femur: femoral neck fracture <i>vs.</i> transtrochanteric fracture

Lima, Ana Lecia Carneiro Leão de Araújo; Miranda, Saul Caldas; Vasconcelos, Hudson Felipe Oliveira de

doi:10.1016/j.rboe.2017.10.007

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ORIGINAL ARTICLE • Rev. bras. ortop. 52 (06) • Nov-Dec 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rboe.2017.10.007 copy

Radiographic anatomy of the proximal femur: femoral neck fracture vs. transtrochanteric fracture^☆ ☆ Study conducted at Hospital Otávio de Freitas, Recife, PE, Brazil.

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To evaluate the correlation between radiographic parameters of the proximal femur with femoral neck fractures or transtrochanteric fractures.

METHODS:

Cervicodiaphyseal angle (CDA), femoral neck width (FNW), hip axis length (HAL), and acetabular tear drop distance (ATD) were analyzed in 30 pelvis anteroposterior view X-rays of patients with femoral neck fractures (n = 15) and transtrochanteric fractures (n = 15). The analysis was performed by comparing the results of the X-rays with femoral neck fractures and with transtrochanteric fractures.

RESULTS:

No statistically significant differences between samples were observed.

CONCLUSION:

There was no correlation between radiographic parameters evaluated and specific occurrence of femoral neck fractures or transtrochanteric fractures.

Keywords:
Hip fractures; Femur neck; Radiography

Angles	Fractures
	Transtrochanteric				Neck
	CDA	FNW	HAL	ATD	CDA	FNW	HAL	ATD
Max	139	42	126	135	139	39	132	134
Min	125	30	99	110	120	29	90	114
M	131.7	34.7	110.2	125.1	131.8	33.2	112.6	122.1
SD	1.2	0.98	2.22	1.96	1.33	0.65	3.08	1.36
n	15	15	15	15	15	15	15	15

Measurements		CDA	FNW	HAL	ATD
Age	Pearson's correlation	0.124	0.049	0.159	0.094
	p-value	0.392	0.735	0.116	0.318
Gender	Pearson's correlation	-0.094	-0.064	-0.225	-0.144
	p-value	0.387	0.516	0.657	0.318
Total	n	50	50	50	50

Pairs	n	MD	95% CI	R	p
CDA Trans × Neck	30	0.13 ± 1.7	-3.5 to 3.8	0.0001	0.69
FNW Trans × Neck	30	-1.46 ± 1.18	-3.89 to 0.95	0.05	0.14
HAL Trans × Neck	30	2.4 ± 3.8	-5.39 to 10.19	0.01	0.53
ATD Trans × Neck	30	-3 ± 2.3	-7.9 to 1.9	0.05	0.22

Pairs	n	r	95% CI	R	p
CDA Trans × Neck	30	0.38	-0.17 to 0.6	0.15	0.15
FNW Trans × Neck	30	0.394	-0.16 to 0.74	0.145	0.14
HAL Trans × Neck	30	0.04	-0.47 to 0.54	0.002	0.43
ATD Trans × Neck	30	-0.06	-0.55 to 0.46	0.003	0.82

Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia Al. Lorena, 427 14º andar, 01424-000 São Paulo - SP - Brasil, Tel.: 55 11 2137-5400 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: rbo@sbot.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author. E-mail: hudsonfelipe3@hotmail.com (H.F. Vasconcelos).

Brasil

Brasil

Radiographic anatomy of the proximal femur: femoral neck fracture vs. transtrochanteric fracture☆ ☆ Study conducted at Hospital Otávio de Freitas, Recife, PE, Brazil.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

METHODS:

RESULTS:

CONCLUSION:

Radiographic anatomy of the proximal femur: femoral neck fracture vs. transtrochanteric fracture^☆ ☆ Study conducted at Hospital Otávio de Freitas, Recife, PE, Brazil.