MOJ Header

Current Issue - November 2020, Volume 14, Issue No. 3

Official Journal of Malaysian Orthopaedic Association and ASEAN Orthopaedic Association

Morphology of Proximal Femur in South-West Coast of India


  1. Daigle ME, Weinstein AM, Katz JN, Losina E. The cost-effectiveness of total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review of published literature. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2012; 26(5): 649-58. doi:10.1016/j.berh.2012.07.013
  2. Bayliss LE, Culliford D, Monk AP, Glyn-Jones S, Prieto-Alhambra D, Judge A, et al. The effect of patient age at intervention on risk of implant revision after total replacement of the hip or knee: a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2017; 389(10077): 1424-30. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30059-4
  3. Evans JT, Evans JP, Walker RW, Blom AW, Whitehouse MR, Sayers A. How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2019; 393(10172): 647-54. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31665-9
  4. Dorr LD, Luckett M, Conaty JP. Total hip arthroplasties in patients younger than 45 years. A nine- to ten-year follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990; (260): 215-9.
  5. Poss R P, Walker P, Spector M, Reilly DT, Robertson DD, Sledge CB. Strategies for improving fixation of femoral components in total hip Arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988; (235): 181-94.
  6. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN, Estève P, de Roguin B. The morphology of proximal femur. A threedimensional radiographic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992; 74(1): 28-32.
  7. Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988; (235): 148-65.
  8. Stiehl JB, Jacobson D, Carrera G. Morphological analysis of the proximal femur using quantitative computed tomography. Int Orthop. 2007; 31(3): 287-92. doi:10.1007/s00264-006-0182-z
  9. Krishnamurthy AB, MacDonald SJ, Paprosky WG. 5- to 13-year follow-up study on cementless femoral components in revision surgery. J Arthroplasty. 1997; 12(8): 839-847. doi:10.1016/s0883-5403(97)90152-2
  10. Walker PS, Douglas D, Robertson DD. Design and fabrication of cementless hip stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988; (235): 25-34.
  11. Noble PC, Box GG, Kamaric E, Fink MJ, Alexander JW, Tullos HS. The effect of aging on the shape of the proximal femur. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;(316):31-44.
  12. Mahaisavariya B, Sitthiseripratip K, Tongdee T, Bohez ELJ, Sloten JV, Oris P. Morphological study of the proximal femur: a new method of geometrical assessment using 3-dimensional reverse engineering. Med Eng Phys. 2002; 24(9): 617-22. doi:10.1016/s1350-4533(02)00113-3
  13. Siwach RC, Dahiya S. Anthropometric study of proximal femur geometry and its clinical application. Indian J Orthop. 2003; 37(4): 247-51. doi: 10.1055/s-0040-1712831
  14. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Heegaard JH. Radiologic changes of anatomic parameters of the proximal femur as a function of its position in rotation. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1989; 75(4): 209-15.
  15. Engh CA, Bobyn JD, Glassman AH. Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987: 69(1): 45-5.
  16. Kate BR, Robert SL. The angle of femoral torsion. J Anat Soc India. 1963;12: 8-11
  17. Sengodan VC, Sinmayanantham E, Kumar JS. Anthropometric analysis of the hip joint in South Indian population using computed tomography. Indian J Orthop. 2017; 51(2): 155-61. doi:10.4103/0019-5413.201709
  18. Deshmukh TR, Kuthe AM, Ingole DS, Thakre SB. Prediction of femur bone geometry using anthropometric data of Indian population: a numerical approach. J Med Sci. 2010; 10: 12-8. doi: 10.3923/jms.2010.12.18
  19. Saikia KC, Bhuyan SK, Rongphar R. Anthropometric study of the hip joint in Northeastern region population with computed tomography scan. Indian J Orthop. 2008; 42(3): 260-6. doi:10.4103/0019-5413.39572
  20. Anderson JY, Trinkaus E. Patterns of sexual, bilateral and interpopulational variation in human femoral neck-shaft angles. J Anat. 1998; 192(2): 279-85. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-7580.1998.19220279.x
  21. United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Human Development Report 2019 Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st century. New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP); 2019. 350 p.
  22. Rawal BR, Ribeiro R, Malhotra R, Bhatnagar N. Anthropometric measurements to design best-fit femoral stem for the Indian population. Indian J Orthop. 2012;46:46-53. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.91634
  23. Umer M, Sepah YJ, Khan A, Wazir A, Ahmed M, Jawad MU. Morphology of the proximal femur in a Pakistani population. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2010; 18(3): 279-81. doi: 10.1177/230949901001800304

Abstract   |   Reference

MOJ footer

About Us

The Malaysian Orthopaedic Journal is a peer-reviewed journal that is published three times a year in both print and electronic online version. The purpose of this journal is to publish original research studies, evaluation of current practices and case reports in various subspecialties of orthopaedics and traumatology, as well as associated fields like basic science, biomedical engineering, rehabilitation medicine and nursing.

Keep in Touch

creative-commons License