Title: Study of a Trochanteric Length of Femur
Authors: Ashish Pandya, Dangar Khima, Singel Tulshi
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v4i4.25
Abstract
Introduction: Trochanteric length of the femur is useful in selection of size of the nail in fracture of femur. It might be useful as a tool of sex determination and racial character.
Aims and objectives: Present study aims to obtain values of trochanteric femoral length and to evaluate its possible usefulness in determining correct sexual identification and as a racial characteristic.
Material and Methods: Study sample consisted of 242 dry, human, adult femora [176male (87 right, 89 left) and 66 female (32 right, 34 left)] from skeletal collections of Anatomy departments of medical colleges.
Observations and Results: Trochanteric length was measured with the help of osteometric board. Mean Values obtained were, 422.92 and 415 for right male and female, and 425.5 and 419.2 for left male and female respectively. Higher value in male was statistically significant (P< 0.05) on right side and insignificant on left side. Demarking point (D.P.) analysis of the data showed that right femora with trochanteric length more than 468.83 were definitely male and less than 344.13 were definitely female. Trochanteric length identified 5.74% of right male femora and 0.00% of right female femora.
Keywords: Trochanteric length, Sexual dimorphism, Femur
References
1. Krogman, W. M. and Iscan, M. Y. Human Skeleton in Forensic Medicine. 2nd Edition, Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, 1986.
2. Kate B.R., Measurements of the Femur for Orthopaedic Surgeons. Indian Journal of Medical Research July. 1970; 58: 896-905.
3. Kate B.R., The Ceylonese Femur and Its Comparisons with Indian and Other Asian Femur. Journal of Anatomical Society of India. 1976; 25(3): 124-127.
4. Ziylan T., & Murshid K.A, An analysis of Anatolian human femur anthropometry, Turkish Journal of Medical science. 2002; 32: 231-235.
5. Ismail Özer and Kazumichi Katayama, Sex determination using the femur in an ancient Japanese population, Coll. Antropol. 32 (2008) 1: 67–72
6. Singh I.P. & Bhasin M.K., Manual of biological anthropology in Osteometry, 1st Edition, Kamla-Raj Prakashan, Delhi, 2004, pp: 79-83.