» Articles » PMID: 21266066

Hip Abductor Moment Arm--a Mathematical Analysis for Proximal Femoral Replacement

Overview
Publisher Biomed Central
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2011 Jan 27
PMID 21266066
Citations 8
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Patients undergoing proximal femoral replacement for tumor resection often have compromised hip abductor muscles resulting in a Trendelenberg limp and hip instability. Commercially available proximal femoral prostheses offer several designs with varying sites of attachment for the abductor muscles, however, no analyses of these configurations have been performed to determine which design provides the longest moment arm for the hip abductor muscles during normal function.

Methods: This study analyzed hip abductor moment arm through hip adduction and abduction with a trigonometric mathematical model to evaluate the effects of alterations in anatomy and proximal femoral prosthesis design. Prosthesis dimensions were taken from technical schematics that were obtained from the prosthesis manufacturers. Manufacturers who contributed schematics for this investigation were Stryker Orthopaedics and Biomet.

Results: Superior and lateral displacement of the greater trochanter increased the hip abductor mechanical advantage for single-leg stance and adduction and preserved moment arm in the setting of Trendelenberg gait. Hip joint medialization resulted in less variance of the abductor moment arm through coronal motion. The Stryker GMRS endoprosthesis provided the longest moment arm in single-leg stance.

Conclusions: Hip abductor moment arm varies substantially throughout the hip's range of motion in the coronal plane. Selection of a proximal femur endoprosthesis with an abductor muscle insertion that is located superiorly and laterally will optimize hip abductor moment arm in single-leg stance compared to one located inferiorly or medially.

Citing Articles

Proximal Femur Megaprostheses in Orthopedic Oncology: Evaluation of a Standardized Post-operative Rehabilitation Protocol.

Andreani L, Ipponi E, Falcinelli F, Cordoni M, Bechini E, Vannucci L Indian J Orthop. 2024; 58(3):323-329.

PMID: 38425819 PMC: 10899131. DOI: 10.1007/s43465-023-01092-1.


Three dimensional analysis of hip joint reaction force using Q Hip Force (AQHF) software: Implication as a diagnostic tool.

Abd El-Tawab A, Farhana A PLoS One. 2022; 17(9):e0273159.

PMID: 36155640 PMC: 9512223. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273159.


Sexual Dimorphism Impact on the Ground Reaction Force Acting on the Mediolateral Direction During Level Walking: Hip Abductor Muscle Biomechanics and Its Correlation to GRF Moment Arm.

Abd-Eltawab A, Ameer M, Eladl M, El-Sherbiny M, Ebrahim H, Elsherbini D Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022; 10:863194.

PMID: 35547172 PMC: 9081438. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.863194.


Novel Cemented Technique for Trochanteric Fixation and Reconstruction of the Abductor Mechanism in Proximal and Total Femoral Arthroplasty: An Observational Study.

Muffly B, Boden K, Jacobs C, ODonnell P, Duncan S Arthroplast Today. 2021; 11:10-14.

PMID: 34409141 PMC: 8360973. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2021.06.009.


Femoral neck shaft angle in relation to the location of femoral stress fracture in young military recruits: femoral head versus femoral neck stress fracture.

Kim D, Kim T Skeletal Radiol. 2020; 50(6):1163-1168.

PMID: 33145605 PMC: 8035084. DOI: 10.1007/s00256-020-03661-z.


References
1.
Antolic V, Iglic A, Herman S, Srakar F, Iglic V, Lebar A . The required resultant abductor force and the available resultant abductor force after operative changes in hip geometry. Acta Orthop Belg. 1994; 60(4):374-7. View

2.
Kotz R, Ritschl P, Trachtenbrodt J . A modular femur-tibia reconstruction system. Orthopedics. 1986; 9(12):1639-52. DOI: 10.3928/0147-7447-19861201-07. View

3.
Crowninshield R, Johnston R, Andrews J, Brand R . A biomechanical investigation of the human hip. J Biomech. 1978; 11(1-2):75-85. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(78)90045-3. View

4.
Mitchell N, Lee E, SHEPARD N . The clones of osteoarthritic cartilage. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992; 74(1):33-8. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.74B1.1732261. View

5.
Jensen R, Davy D . An investigation of muscle lines of action about the hip: a centroid line approach vs the straight line approach. J Biomech. 1975; 8(2):103-10. DOI: 10.1016/0021-9290(75)90090-1. View