ArticleInternational journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery2026
Quantifying the anatomical variability of the proximal femur.
Article in International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAchieving a prosthetic femoral version (PFV) within the target range of 10-20° is crucial for optimal biomechanics in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Predicting the PFV preoperatively is challenging due to the limited understanding of the relationship between native femoral version (NFV) and the morphology of the intramedullary canal. This study aims to quantify the 3D morphological variability and identify the most variable anatomical features of the proximal femur pre- and post-operatively.
methodsPre- and post-operative CT scans from 62 patients (31 males, 31 females) who underwent THA and received a single stem design (straight, triple-tapered) were analysed. Four femoral models were generated per patient: 1. Native proximal femur, 2. Native femur after neck osteotomy, 3. Internal femoral canal after neck osteotomy, and 4. Reconstructed femur. Statistical Shape Models (SSMs) were developed separately by sex, and principal component analysis (PCA) was used to identify dominant modes of anatomical variation.
resultsThe first three principal components (PCs) accounted for over 60% of shape variability across all models. PFV showed weak correlation with NFV as variability existed between the SSM of the internal femoral canal and SSM of the native proximal femur. Sex-specific differences in the measured NFV and PFV were found, with females exhibiting a greater range and a more anteverted femur/femoral stem. The female canal model showed intramedullary version variability; however, this variability was not present in the first three PCs in the corresponding male model.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that PFV cannot be reliably predicted from NFV alone. These findings underscore the need for advanced, 3D preoperative planning tools to better predict stem version and accommodate patient-specific anatomy. Additionally, the increased variability observed in females may warrant sex-specific consideration in implant design choice and surgical technique.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.