Main Article Content

Mahboob Ali
Asif Ali
Abdul Qadeer Khan Sadiq
Faraz Khan
Nadeem Hassan
Yaseen Bhatti


Femoral neck shaft angle, anteroposterior view of pelvis and Mean FNSA.


Objective: To determine the femoral neck shaft angle in a Pakistani population.

Study Design: Cross sectional study

Place and Duration: This Single center study was conducted at JPMC Karachi, a tertiary care center located in Karachi for period of six months.

Methods: The study was conducted by the Department of Orthopedic, JPMC Karachi. Once an eligible patient was identified, the study details were carefully discussed and informed consent attained. A total of 150 patients were selected by Consecutive non-probability sampling technique. After attaining the consent, an anteroposterior view of pelvis with both hip joints was obtained. Data was entered and analyzed using SPSS version 21.0. Mean ± SD was computed for age, height and weight and femoral neck shaft angle.

Results: Total study population of 150 was included, among the study participants n=88 were males (58.7%) and n=62(41.3%) were females; mean age of participants was 41.4 years. The mean femoral neck shaft angle was found to be 129.8 degrees. Mean FNSA in males was 129.5 while in females it was 130 degrees. No significant difference was found between males and females NSA. Thirty participants had NSA of 135 degrees

Conclusion: The next generation of femoral hip stem designs for total hip replacement will benefit from this study. This study found that FNS angles in patients' femurs are changing with age, so a hip stem with a modular neck may be better. Shaft angle of our population to minimize complications like malunion, non-union and cut out leading to increased morbidity and multiple surgeries.

Abstract 125 | PDF Downloads 29


1. Radha P, Ravi SG, Naveen NS, Roopa CR. Evaluation of neck shaft angle of femur on dry bones. J Evol Med Dent Sci 2015;4:5518-22.
2. Duncan RD. Developmental dysplasia of the hip In. In: Benson M, Fixsen J, Macnicol M, editors. Children’s orthopedics and fractures. 3. Churchill Livingstone; London: 2010. p. 435.
3. Souza AD, Ankolekar VH, Padmashali S, Das A, Souza A, Hosapatna M. Femoral Neck Anteversion and Neck Shaft Angles: Determination and their Clinical Implications in Fetuses of Different Gestational Ages. Malays Orthop J. 2015;9(2):33-36.
4. Adekoya-Cole TO, Akinmokun OI, Soyebi KO, Oguche OE. Femoral neck shaft angles: A radiological arthropometry study. Niger Postgrad Med J.2016;23:17-20.
5. Snell RS. The lower limb. Clinical Anatomy by Regions. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008. p. 561.
6. Sharma V, Kumar K, Kalia V, Soni PK. Evaluation of femoral neck-shaft angle in subhimalayan population of North West India using digital radiography and dry bobe measurement. J Sci Soc.2018;45:3-7.
7. Kukla C, Gaehier C. Predictive geometric factors in a standardized model of femoral neck fracture. Injury, 2002; 33 (50): 427-433
8. Bhattacharya S, Chakraborty P, Mukherjee AA. Correlation between neck shaft angle of femur with age and anthropometry: A radiographic study. Indian J Basic Appl Med Res 2014;3:100-7.
9. Gilligan I, Chandraphak S, Mahakkanukrauh P. Femoral neck-shaft angle in humans: Variation relating to climate, clothing, lifestyle, sex, age and side. J Anat 2013;223:133-51.”
10. Cheng XG, Lowet G. Assessment of the strength of proximal femur in vitro: relationship to femoral bone mineral density and femoral geometry. Bone, 1997; 20 (3): 213-S. 9.
11. Hoaglund FT, Weng DL. Anatomy of the femoral neck and head, with comparative data from Caucasians and Hong Kong Chinese. Clinical Orthopaedics, 1980: 10-16.
12. Akbar W, Kalim U. A radiographic study of neck shaft angle in a population of Mardan region, Khyber Pukhtonkhwa, Pakistan. Biomedica 2015;31:108-14.
13. Pillai TJ, Lakshmi Devi CK, Devi TS. Osteometric studies on human femurs. IOSRJDMS. 2014;13(2):34-9.
14. Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 2009 Apr 1;467(4):876.
15. Lunn DE, Lampropoulos A, Stewart TD. Basic biomechanics of the hip. Orthopaedics and Trauma. 2016 Jun 1;30(3):239-46.
16. Susan Standring. Femur. Gray’s anatomy. The anatomical basis of clinical practice. 40th Edn. 2008 .p.1360-1365 and 1390.
17. Datta AK. The femur. Essentials of Human Osteology. 2nd Edn. 2005 .p.181- 186.
18. Moore KL, Dalley AF, Agur AMR. Clinically oriented anatomy. 6th Edn. Philadelphia :Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2009 .p.516-518.
19. John V. Basmajian. Grants method of anatomy. 8th Edn. 1972 .p.334-335.
20. Robert B. Duthie and George Bentley. Mercer’s orthopedic surgery. 9th Edn. 1996.p.374-376
21. Delaunay S, Dusault RG, et al. Radiographic measurements of dysplastic adult hips.1997 .p.78-80.
22. Umer M, Sepah YJ, Khan A, Wazir A, Ahmed M, Jawad MU. Morphology of the proximal femur in a Pakistani population. Journal of orthopaedic surgery. 2010 Dec;18(3):279-81.
23. Srivastava R, Saini V, Rai RK, Pandey S, Tripathi SK. A study of sexual dimorphism in the femur among North Indians. Journal of forensic sciences. 2012 Jan;57(1):19-23.
24. Krishan K, Kanchan T, DiMaggio JA. A study of limb asymmetry and its effect on estimation of stature in forensic case work. Forensic science international. 2010 Jul 15;200(1-3):181-e1.
25. Cho, H. J., Kwak, D. S., & Kim, I. B. (2015). Morphometric evaluation of Korean femurs by geometric computation: Comparisons of the sex and the population. BioMed Research International, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/730538
26. Khan SM, Saheb SH. Study on neck shaft angle and femoral length of south Indian femurs. Int J Anat Res. 2014;2(4):633-35.

Most read articles by the same author(s)