Strategies for Managing the Destruction of Calcar Femorale

Overview

Journal BMC Musculoskelet Disord

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Orthopedics
Physiology

Date 2021 May 20

PMID 34011332

Citations 6

Authors

Jin Mei

Lili Pang

Zhongchao Jiang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The calcar femorale was identified long ago. However, our current understanding of the calcar is insufficient, and its related concepts are sometimes confused. The calcar femoral is an important anatomical structure of the proximal femur, and its function can be overlooked. In trauma, tumors, or other diseases, the calcar femorale can be destroyed or changed pathologically. As a result, the mechanical structure of the proximal femur becomes destroyed, causing pathological fractures. How to address the destruction of the calcar femorale or the damage to the calcar femorale is discussed in this article.

Main Text: Destruction of the calcar femorale is accompanied by many conditions, including trauma, tumors, and other diseases. The types of hip fractures caused by trauma include femoral neck fractures and intertrochanteric fractures. Dynamic hip screws, proximal femoral nail anti-rotation, and multiple parallel cannulate pins can be used in different conditions. When metastatic and primary bone tumors involve the calcar femorale, endoprostheses are widely used. Other diseases, such as fibrous dysplasia and aneurysmal bone cyst are treated differently.

Conclusions: The calcar femorale can redistribute stresses and the destruction of the calcar femorale can lead to an increase in posterior medial stress. Many factors need to be considered when deciding whether to reconstruct the calcar femorale. Effective treatment strategies for managing the destruction of calcar femorale will need first establishing the precise mechanism of the destruction of the calcar and then designing therapies towards these mechanisms. Further investigation to the calcar needs to be carried out.

Citing Articles

Understanding the variability of the proximal femoral canal: A computational modeling study.

Ramesh A, Henckel J, Hart A, Di Laura A J Orthop Res. 2024; 43(1):173-182.

PMID: 39294102 PMC: 11615424. DOI: 10.1002/jor.25971.

Biomechanical comparison of femoral neck anti-rotation and support system versus femoral neck system for unstable pauwels III femoral neck fractures.

Wang T, Wang G, Zhu F, Qiao B J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):500.

PMID: 39175021 PMC: 11340060. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-024-04987-3.

Structural characteristics, biomechanics and clinical significance of calcar femorale: A review.

Zhou X, Jia J, Lian K Medicine (Baltimore). 2024; 103(21):e38323.

PMID: 38788003 PMC: 11124754. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000038323.

Lateral wall thickness is not associated with revision risk of medially stable intertrochanteric fractures fixed with a sliding hip screw.

Chen B, Duckworth A, Farrow L, Xu Y, Clement N Bone Jt Open. 2024; 5(2):123-131.

PMID: 38342131 PMC: 10859223. DOI: 10.1302/2633-1462.52.BJO-2023-0141.R1.

Reconstruction of massive bone defects after femoral tumor resection using two new-designed 3D-printed intercalary prostheses: a clinical analytic study with the cooperative utilization of multiple technologies.

Shao X, Dou M, Yang Q, Li J, Zhang A, Yao Y BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2023; 24(1):67.

PMID: 36698116 PMC: 9875495. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-023-06171-w.

References

Araki N, Chuman H, Matsunobu T, Tanaka K, Katagiri H, Kunisada T . Factors associated with the decision of operative procedure for proximal femoral bone metastasis: Questionnaire survey to institutions participating the Bone and Soft Tissue Tumor Study Group of the Japan Clinical Oncology Group. J Orthop Sci. 2017; 22(5):938-945. DOI: 10.1016/j.jos.2017.05.012. View

Sedrine W, Chevallier T, Zegels B, Kvasz A, Micheletti M, Gelas B . Development and assessment of the Osteoporosis Index of Risk (OSIRIS) to facilitate selection of women for bone densitometry. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2002; 16(3):245-50. View

Mont M, Maar D, Krackow K, Hungerford D . Hoop-stress fractures of the proximal femur during hip arthroplasty. Management and results in 19 cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992; 74(2):257-60. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.74B2.1544964. View

Hammer A . The structure of the femoral neck: A physical dissection with emphasis on the internal trabecular system. Ann Anat. 2010; 192(3):168-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.aanat.2010.02.007. View

Li B, Aspden R . A comparison of the stiffness, density and composition of bone from the calcar femorale and the femoral cortex. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2004; 9(11):661-6. DOI: 10.1023/a:1008987626212. View

Berend K, Lombardi Jr A, Mallory T, Chonko D, Dodds K, Adams J . Cerclage wires or cables for the management of intraoperative fracture associated with a cementless, tapered femoral prosthesis: results at 2 to 16 years. J Arthroplasty. 2004; 19(7 Suppl 2):17-21. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.06.008. View

Zhang Q, Chen W, Liu H, Li Z, Song Z, Pan J . The role of the calcar femorale in stress distribution in the proximal femur. Orthop Surg. 2011; 1(4):311-6. PMC: 6583181. DOI: 10.1111/j.1757-7861.2009.00053.x. View

Nakanishi Y, Hiranaka T, Shirahama M, Uesugi M, Okimura K, Tsubosaka M . Ideal screw positions for multiple screw fixation in femoral neck fractures - Study of proximal femur morphology in a Japanese population. J Orthop Sci. 2018; 23(3):521-524. DOI: 10.1016/j.jos.2018.01.012. View

Oh I, Harris W . Proximal strain distribution in the loaded femur. An in vitro comparison of the distributions in the intact femur and after insertion of different hip-replacement femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978; 60(1):75-85. View

10.

TianYe L, Peng Y, JingLi X, QiuShi W, GuangQuan Z, Wei H . Finite element analysis of different internal fixation methods for the treatment of Pauwels type III femoral neck fracture. Biomed Pharmacother. 2019; 112:108658. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.108658. View

11.

Capanna R, Scoccianti G, Frenos F, Vilardi A, Beltrami G, Campanacci D . What was the survival of megaprostheses in lower limb reconstructions after tumor resections?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 473(3):820-30. PMC: 4317421. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3736-1. View

12.

Griffin J . The calcar femorale redefined. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982; (164):211-4. View

13.

Peacock M, Liu G, Carey M, Ambrosius W, Turner C, Hui S . Bone mass and structure at the hip in men and women over the age of 60 years. Osteoporos Int. 1998; 8(3):231-9. DOI: 10.1007/s001980050059. View

14.

Huiskes R, Weinans H, van Rietbergen B . The relationship between stress shielding and bone resorption around total hip stems and the effects of flexible materials. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992; (274):124-34. View

15.

Kashigar A, Vincent A, Gunton M, Backstein D, Safir O, Kuzyk P . Predictors of failure for cephalomedullary nailing of proximal femoral fractures. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(8):1029-34. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B8.33644. View

16.

Kauffman J, Simon J, Kummer F, Pearlman C, Zuckerman J, Koval K . Internal fixation of femoral neck fractures with posterior comminution: a biomechanical study. J Orthop Trauma. 1999; 13(3):155-9. DOI: 10.1097/00005131-199903000-00001. View

17.

Kuzyk P, Zdero R, Shah S, Olsen M, Waddell J, Schemitsch E . Femoral head lag screw position for cephalomedullary nails: a biomechanical analysis. J Orthop Trauma. 2012; 26(7):414-21. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0b013e318229acca. View

18.

Farkas A, Wilson M, HAYNER J . An anatomical study of the mechanics, pathology, and healing of fracture of the femoral neck; a preliminary report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1948; 30A(1):53-59. View

19.

Rapp T, Ward J, Alaia M . Aneurysmal bone cyst. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2012; 20(4):233-41. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-20-04-233. View

20.

Janssen S, Langerhuizen D, Schwab J, Bramer J . Outcome after reconstruction of proximal femoral tumors: A systematic review. J Surg Oncol. 2018; 119(1):120-129. DOI: 10.1002/jso.25297. View