Literature DB >> 15722276

Percutaneous drilling of symptomatic accessory navicular in young athletes.

Shoichiro Nakayama1, Kazuya Sugimoto, Yoshinori Takakura, Yasuhito Tanaka, Ryoji Kasanami.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Results of percutaneous drilling for symptomatic type II accessory tarsal navicular bone are not determined. HYPOTHESIS: Percutaneous drilling of accessory navicular synchondrosis will induce or accelerate bone union between the accessory and primary navicular bones. Bone union of the synchondrosis leads to symptomatic relief. STUDY
DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.
METHODS: Thirty-one feet of 29 patients with type II accessory tarsal navicular treated by percutaneous drilling were reviewed.
RESULTS: Twenty-four feet (77.4%) were assessed as excellent, 6 (19.4%) as good, and 1 (3.2%) as fair. No feet were assessed as poor. Bone union was obtained in 16 (80%) of the 20 feet when the proximal phalanx of the great toe was immature and in 2 of the 11 feet when it was mature.
CONCLUSION: Percutaneous drilling of the synchondrosis was effective for a symptomatic type II accessory navicular, especially in patients with immature proximal phalanx of the great toe.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15722276     DOI: 10.1177/0363546504270564

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Sports Med        ISSN: 0363-5465            Impact factor:   6.202


  9 in total

1.  Os naviculare: the multi-ossicle configuration of a normal variant.

Authors:  Evangelos Perdikakis; Eleni Grigoraki; Apostolos Karantanas
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2010-05-09       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  Endoscopic Accessory Navicular Synchondrosis Fusion.

Authors:  Tun Hing Lui
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2016-11-07

3.  The incidence of accessory navicular bone types in Turkish subjects.

Authors:  Nigar Keles Coskun; Ramazan Yavuz Arican; Arzu Utuk; Haluk Ozcanli; Timur Sindel
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 1.246

4.  Endoscopic Fusion of the Accessory Navicular Synchondrosis That Has No Diastasis.

Authors:  Tun Hing Lui
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2017-03-06

5.  Accessory navicular bone incidence in Chinese patients: a retrospective analysis of X-rays following trauma or progressive pain onset.

Authors:  Jiazhang Huang; Yijun Zhang; Xin Ma; Xu Wang; Chao Zhang; Li Chen
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2013-07-30       Impact factor: 1.246

6.  A retrospective study on factors predictive of operative intervention in symptomatic accessory navicular.

Authors:  D M Knapik; H D Archibald; K K Xie; R W Liu
Journal:  J Child Orthop       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 1.548

7.  A retrospective multicenter study of quantitative bone SPECT/CT to predict the surgical removal of the accessory navicular bone.

Authors:  Ji-Young Kim; Ji Young Kim; Soo Bin Park; Chulhan Kim; Won Woo Lee
Journal:  Nucl Med Commun       Date:  2021-09-01       Impact factor: 1.698

Review 8.  Accessory Ossicles of the Foot and Ankle: Disorders and a Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Nigar Keles-Celik; Ozkan Kose; Rahime Sekerci; Gunes Aytac; Adil Turan; Ferhat Güler
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2017-11-26

9.  Revision Surgery for Recurrent Pain after Excision of the Accessory Navicular and Relocation of the Tibialis Posterior Tendon.

Authors:  Hong Joon Choi; Woo Chun Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2017-05-08
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.