The Antiquity of the Cam Deformity

Moats, Allison R; Badrinath, Raghav; Spurlock, Linda; Cooperman, Daniel R.

doi:10.2106/jbjs.o.00169

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors were unsure whether this represented differences in activity, diet, or other factors. To our knowledge, no other study of ancient populations has reproduced Moats et al's [14] findings in a different cohort. Interestingly, a recent radiologic evaluation of a single specimen by Zurmühle et al [27] found that cam morphology existed as early as 5000 years ago.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…This study was designed to address the reported inconsistencies regarding cam morphology in historical populations. Moats et al [14] found no cam morphology in the population from 1000 years ago, while a single specimen studied by Zurmühle et al [27] suggests that it existed as early as 5000 years ago. Given that it is difficult to make conclusions about whether primary cam existed historically based on a single specimen, our purpose was to search for evidence of cam morphology in the Neolithic population from Iran, the medieval population from Poland, and the contemporary Australian aborigine population.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The incidence of cam morphology was assessed by measuring the alpha angle in the inclination view. An angle > 55°was considered indicative of the cam morphology, based on previous anatomical studies [15,17] and with the goal of setting a more stringent value than > 50°as used by Moats et al [14]. Moreover, we measured the true neck-shaft angle on the true AP view, the neck-shaft angle on the apparent AP view, the version angle on the version view, and the inclination angle on the inclination view to evaluate the differences in anatomy between populations.…”

Section: Morphologic and Image Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To evaluate the relationship between cam morphology and modern lifestyles, Moats et al [14] compared a population from more than 1000 years ago with a population from approximately 100 years ago and found cam morphology only in the latter population. The authors were unsure whether this represented differences in activity, diet, or other factors.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Is Cam Morphology Found in Ancient and Medieval Populations in Addition to Modern Populations?

Musielak

Kubicka

Woźniak

et al. 2021

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Cam morphology is thought to originate near puberty and reflects a response of the peripheral aspect of the proximal femoral physis to increased local load. Participation in particular sports activities has been associated with cam morphology in contemporary patient populations; however, it is unclear whether cam is a recent phenomenon. There are limited data regarding the frequency of its occurrence and the general deviations in femoral anatomy in different historical populations. Such information may help to understand the possible influence of lifestyle and diet on cam morphology. Questions/purposes The purpose of this study was to evaluate femoral morphology in three historical populations. We asked: (1) Was cam morphology present in the three study populations, did those populations differ, and were there differences between sexes? (2) Were there differences in neck-shaft angle, version, or inclination between and among the examined populations? Methods We examined 204 adult femurs from the Neolithic population from Iran (n = 37, 3000 BC to 1631 BC), medieval population from Poland (n = 135, 10th to 13th centuries), and contemporary Australian aborigines (n = 32, early 20th century), provided by the Open Research Scan Archive, Museum of the First Piasts at Lednica and the University of Wrocław, respectively. All three human populations represent different chronologic periods and lifestyles. All bones were scanned using CT and then measured on their three-dimensional (3-D) reconstructions in selected planes. Cam impingement was defined as an alpha angle > 55° measured on the inclination view. To evaluate the differences in anatomy between populations, we measured the true neck-shaft angle on the true AP view, apparent neck-shaft angle on the apparent AP view, the version angle on the version view, and the inclination angle on the inclination view. The prevalence of cam morphology and other anatomic parameters were compared among groups using chi-square test, one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey test, and paired t-test. Results Cam morphology was present in 5% of the Neolithic population from Iran, in 7% of the medieval population from Poland, and 3% of the contemporary Australian aborigine femurs (OR Neolithic population from Iran/the medieval population from Poland 0.7 [95% CI 0.2 to 3.4]; p = 0.67; OR Neolithic population from Iran/contemporary Australian aborigines 1.8 [95% CI 0.2 to 20.5]; p = 0.65; OR the medieval population from Poland/contemporary Australian aborigines 2.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 20.1]; p = 0.40). There were differences in the presence of cam morphology between the sexes in the medieval population from Poland with both femurs (females: 1% [1 of 76]; males: 15% [9 of 59]; p = 0.002). There was a difference in true neck-shaft angle between the Neolithic population from Iran (121° ± 6°) and contemporary Australian aborigines (131° ± 5°; mean difference 10° [95% CI 7° to 13°]; p < 0.001) and between the medieval population from Poland (124° ± 5°) and the contemporary Australian aborigines (mean difference 7° [95% CI 5° to 9°]; p < 0.001). Apparent neck-shaft angle differed between the Neolithic population from Iran (126° ± 6°) and the contemporary Australian aborigines (134° ± 5°; mean difference 8° [95% CI 6° to 11°]; p < 0.001), and between the medieval population from Poland (126° ± 6°) and the contemporary Australian aborigines (mean difference 9° [95% CI 7° to 11°]; p < 0.001). Moreover, we observed a difference in the version angle between the Neolithic population from Iran (19° ± 7°) and the medieval population from Poland (12° ± 9°; mean difference 7° [95% CI 4° to 10°]; p < 0.001] and in the inclination angle between aforementioned groups (18° ± 7° versus 11° ± 8°; mean difference 7° [95% CI 5° to 10°]; p < 0.001). Conclusion This study found that cam morphology existed in historical populations at rates comparable with a contemporary population. Clinical Relevance The presence of cam morphology in historical populations suggests that cam morphology can develop outside of the intense sports activity seen in modern adolescents. Further study will help elucidate the etiology of cam morphology, which may be useful in the development of preventive strategies.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 60%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Morphologic and Image Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Is Cam Morphology Found in Ancient and Medieval Populations in Addition to Modern Populations?

Musielak

Kubicka

Woźniak

et al. 2021

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Studies have disagreed as to whether the cam morphology is a product of modern activities or whether it was present in historical or even ancient populations. Some studies have found evidence of cam morphology in ancient and older 20 th century populations [8,15], while another study examining the osteology from an indigenous North American population from approximately 1000 years ago did not find evidence of cam morphology, suggesting it may be a modern phenomenon [10].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

CORR Insights®: Is Cam Morphology Found in Ancient and Medieval Populations in Addition to Modern Populations?

Ricciardi

2021

Clin Orthop Relat Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The author certifies that neither he, nor any members of his immediate family, have any commercial or funding associations (consultancies, stock ownership, equity interest, patent/licensing arrangements, etc.) that might pose a conflict of interest in connection with the submitted article. All ICMJE Conflict of Interest Forms for authors and Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research ® editors and board members are on file with the publication and can be viewed on request. The opinions expressed are those of the writer, and do not reflect the opinion or policy of CORR ® or The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons ® .

show abstract

Secular evolution of femoral morphology from a clinical perspective

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionIntramedullary nailing is the surgical method of choice for the treatment of proximal femur or femoral shaft fractures. Implant manufacturers aim to design implants fitting for the broadest possible population segment. As complete morphological data sets of long bones are not widely available, anatomical collections of historical dry bone specimens may represent abundant additional sources of morphological three‐dimensional (3D) data for implant design, provided they are consistent with present populations. This study aims to investigate secular trends and age‐related changes of femoral morphology of the Caucasian population over the past 800 years.Materials and methodsComputer graphical measurements of 3D‐datasets of right and left femora derived from computed tomography (CT) scans, representative of the present Caucasian population, were compared to computer graphical measurements of 3D‐datasets of right and left femora derived from CT scans of specimens from a historical medieval European bone collection.ResultsClinically relevant parameters of historical medieval European femora were found mostly consistent with correlative data of the present Caucasian population. Additionally, for some of the evaluated parameters, particularly anteversion, morphological differences significantly correlated to individual age and sex could be identified, whereas other parameters such as caput‐collum‐diaphyseal angle or radius of anterior femoral bowing were not correlated to individual age or sex.ConclusionThe findings suggest that more recent historical specimen collections may be a convenient and easily accessible source of new 3D morphological data, as well as to complement existing data, to be used by researchers and manufacturers for the development of intramedullary femoral nails.

show abstract

The Antiquity of the Cam Deformity

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

Is Cam Morphology Found in Ancient and Medieval Populations in Addition to Modern Populations?

Is Cam Morphology Found in Ancient and Medieval Populations in Addition to Modern Populations?

CORR Insights®: Is Cam Morphology Found in Ancient and Medieval Populations in Addition to Modern Populations?

Secular evolution of femoral morphology from a clinical perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About