Type of Article:  Original Research

Volume 8; Issue 1.1 (January 2020)

Page No.: 7200-7206

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2019.350


Vinay G 1, Naveen Kumar B *2, Kalpana Thondapu 3.

1 Professor & Head, Department of Anatomy, Mamata Medical College, Khammam, Telangana, India.

*2 Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, Mamata Academy of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad, Telangana, India.

3 Associate Professor, Department of Anatomy, Mamata Medical College, Khammam, Telangana, India. 

Corresponding Author: Dr Naveen Kumar B, Associate professor, Department of Anatomy, Mamata Academy of Medical Sciences, Hyderabad – 500090, Telangana, India. E-Mail: anatmmc@gmail.com


Introduction: The surgeries over the proximal end of femur is common procedure in orthopaedics. Knowledge of proximal femur’s morphometry can be helpful in reducing the risk of complications linked to surgeries done in this region due to vascular, metabolic or traumatic causes. The present study is therefore conducted to provide data on the morphometric values of proximal femur and to customize the implant design to suit the Telangana population and thereby reducing the complications.

Objectives:  1.To study the various measurements of proximal end of femur  2. To compare the results with previous studies.

Materials and Methods: A total of 180 dry femur have been collected from Department of Anatomy, Mamata Medical College. With the aid of the vernier calliper, goniometer and osteometric board, measurements such as femoral length, transverse diameter of the head, anterior neck length and angle of the neck shaft were measured.

Results: The average length of the left femur was 43.33 ± 2.72 cm and 42.95 ± 3.29 cm of the right femur. The anterior neck length of the right femur was 2.69 ± 0.41 cm, and left femur was 2.61 ±0.34 cm. The neck shaft angle of left femur was 120.3° ± 5.26 and right femur was 119.92° ± 6.27.

Conclusion: Relative to other populations, this study showed the measurements of proximal femur in Telangana population were different. The results of this study can be significant in anthropological and medico-legal practice as well as for the diagnosis and treatment planning of radiologists and orthopaedic surgeons.

Key words: Femur, Proximal end, Morphometry, Neck shaft angle.


  1. Moore KL, Dalley AF. Clinically Oriented Anatomy: 6th ed. Philadelphia / Elsevier; 2010. P. 517-20.
  2. Standring S, Borley NR, Gray H. Gray’s anatomy: the anatomical basis of clinical practice. 41st ed. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone/Elsevier; 2016. P. 1379-42.
  3. Sobana M, Nedunchezhiyan S. Osteometric study of proximal femur. Int J Anat Res 2019;7(1.1):6108-6112.
  4. Sundar G & Sangeetha V. Morphometric study of human femur. Ind Jr of Med Research and Pharma Sciences. 2018;5(3):52-55.
  5. Peter E L, Pavani Marapaka. Examination evaluation and statistical analysis of human femoral anthropometry in Hyderabad and Secunderabad regions, India. Ind Jr of Clin Anat and Phy. 2016;3(4);427-432.
  6. Shakil Mohamad Khan, Shaik Hussain Saheb. Study on neck shaft angle and femoral length of south Indian femurs. Int J Anat Res. 2014;2(4):633-635.
  7. Mahesh Vemavarapu, Jyothinath Kothapalli, Vijayendranath, Kulkarni. Estimation of collo-diaphyseal angle of femur by Martin’s dioptrograph: a comparative study. Int J Anat Res 2016;4(1):1772-1776.
  8. Mrunal Muley, Pritha Bhuiyan. Morphometric study of neck of dry adult femora. Int J Anat Res 2017;5(3.2):4317-4320.
  9. Ravichandran D, Muthukumaravel N, Jaikumar R, Das H, Rajendran M. Pxoximal femoral geometry in Indians and its clinical applications.J.Anat. Soc.India 2011;60(1):6-12.
  10. Noble PC,Jerry W, Alexander JW et al. The anatomical basis of femoral component design. Clinical Orhp 1998; 235:148-165.
  11. Gnudi,S, Ripamonti,C, Lisi L, Fini M, Giardino R. & Giavaresi G. Proximal femur geometry to detect and distinguish femoral neck fracture from trochanteric fractures in post menopausal women. Osteoporos. Int. 2002; 13:69-73.
  12. Gujar S, Vikani S, Parmar J, Bondre KV. A Correlation between Femoral Neck Shaft Angle to Femoral Neck Length. Int J Biomed & Adv Res 2013; 4(5): 295-298.
  13. Dhivya S, Nandhini V. A Study of Certain Femoral Metrics in South Indian Population and its Clinical Importance. Int J Sci Stud 2015; 3(7):132-135.
  14. Toogood PA, Skalak A, Cooperman DR. Proximal femoral anatomy in the normal human population. ClinOrthopRelat Res 2009;467:876-85.
  15. Da Silva V, Oda JY, Santana DMG. Anatomical aspects of the proximal femur for adult Brazilians. Int. J. Morphol. 2003;21(4):303-8.
  16. Davivongs V. The femur of the Australian Aborigine. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 1963 Dec;21(4):457-67.
  17. Baba H, Endo B. Postcranial skeleton of the Minatogawa man. In The Minatogawa Man. The Upper Pleistocene Man from the Island of Okinawa (ed. Suzuki H, Hanihara K) Bulletin of the University Museum, University of Tokyo 1982:19:61–195.

Cite this article: Vinay G, Naveen Kumar B, Kalpana Thondapu. MORPHOMETRIC STUDY OF PROXIMAL END OF FEMUR IN TELANGANA POPULATION. Int J Anat Res 2020;8(1.1):7247-7250. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2019.350