Femoral Version Measurements Vary Significantly Between Commonly Used Methods: Implications for Defining Diagnostic Thresholds

BACKGROUND: An accurate measurement of femoral version is essential for diagnosing version abnormalities, determining the need for a surgical intervention, and establishing the extent of correction required. However, in the literature, numerous measurement techniques have been described. PURPOSE: To (1) evaluate the differences among 4 different 2- and 3-dimensional (2D and 3D, respectively) techniques for measuring femoral version, (2) assess the effect of femoral version on differences between measurement techniques, and (3) examine the accuracy of an automated method in determining femoral version using commonly employed techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 100 patients who underwent hip preservation surgery at a single academic center were analyzed (measured and segmented). Pelvic computed tomography was used to measure femoral version using 4 established methods: 2 were 2D axial techniques (Murphy and Reikeras), and 2 were 3D reconstructions (Sugano and Lee). Overall, 4 assessors performed the axial measurements. Measurements were performed relative to the posterior condylar axis (PCA) and transepicondylar axis (TEA). Discrepancies in femoral version between different techniques and interobserver correlations were determined. Linear regression equations to convert femoral version values between methods were established. Using these equations, we calculated the range for each method to be 10° to 25° as per the Murphy method, described as "normative" in the literature. RESULTS: < .001) femoral measurements. CONCLUSION: Femoral version measurements varied significantly between methods, with more proximal reference axes yielding lower values. Despite high reproducibility, the methods differed in mean values, emphasizing the importance of method-specific normal ranges. While 2D methods are common, 3D imaging, supported by quick and user-friendly software, serves as a more detailed and practical assessment.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
Published
2026-05-11
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465261439081
Primary Topic
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Femoral Version Measurements Vary Significantly Between Commonly Used Methods: Implications for Defining Diagnostic Thresholds

Camille Vorimore, Paul Beaulé, Andrew Speirs, Marco Tien-Yueh Schneider et al.
The American Journal of Sports Medicine
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
article

Femoral Version Measurements Vary Significantly Between Commonly Used Methods: Implications for Defining Diagnostic Thresholds

Camille Vorimore, Paul Beaulé, Andrew Speirs, Marco Tien-Yueh Schneider, Kawan Rakhra, George Grammatopoulos, Kevin Smit
article en

Abstract

BACKGROUND: An accurate measurement of femoral version is essential for diagnosing version abnormalities, determining the need for a surgical intervention, and establishing the extent of correction required. However, in the literature, numerous measurement techniques have been described. PURPOSE: To (1) evaluate the differences among 4 different 2- and 3-dimensional (2D and 3D, respectively) techniques for measuring femoral version, (2) assess the effect of femoral version on differences between measurement techniques, and (3) examine the accuracy of an automated method in determining femoral version using commonly employed techniques. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: A total of 100 patients who underwent hip preservation surgery at a single academic center were analyzed (measured and segmented). Pelvic computed tomography was used to measure femoral version using 4 established methods: 2 were 2D axial techniques (Murphy and Reikeras), and 2 were 3D reconstructions (Sugano and Lee). Overall, 4 assessors performed the axial measurements. Measurements were performed relative to the posterior condylar axis (PCA) and transepicondylar axis (TEA). Discrepancies in femoral version between different techniques and interobserver correlations were determined. Linear regression equations to convert femoral version values between methods were established. Using these equations, we calculated the range for each method to be 10° to 25° as per the Murphy method, described as "normative" in the literature. RESULTS: < .001) femoral measurements. CONCLUSION: Femoral version measurements varied significantly between methods, with more proximal reference axes yielding lower values. Despite high reproducibility, the methods differed in mean values, emphasizing the importance of method-specific normal ranges. While 2D methods are common, 3D imaging, supported by quick and user-friendly software, serves as a more detailed and practical assessment.

The American Journal of Sports Medicine
University of Ottawa (CA), Ottawa Hospital (CA), Auckland University of Technology (NZ), Carleton University (CA)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.