Feridun Cilli1, Mustafa Akçaoğlu. 1. Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology (Ortopedi ve Travmatoloji Kliniği), Kayseri Military Hospital, Kayseri, Turkey. feriduncilli@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Accessory bones of the foot are often confused with avulsion fractures. This study was designed to investigate the incidence of accessory bones of the foot. METHODS: Anteroposterior and lateral foot radiographs of 464 male patients with an age range of 20 to 46 years were examined with regard to the presence, incidence, and distribution of accessory bones. Identification of the accessory bones were made according to the Kohler classification. RESULTS: Of 464 radiographs, accessory bones were identified in 85 feet (18.3%), all of which were symptomless. The most common accessory bones in descending order were os peroneum (31.8%), os naviculare (28.2%), os trigonum (23.5%), os vesalianum (5.9%), os supranaviculare (3.5%), os infranaviculare (3.5%), os supratalare (2.4%), and os intermetatarseum (1.2%). CONCLUSION: Accessory bones of the foot should be well recognized and their clinical significance should be appreciated in order to decrease the rate of incorrect diagnoses and unnecessary orthopedic consultations on initial presentations of patients with foot complaints.
OBJECTIVES: Accessory bones of the foot are often confused with avulsion fractures. This study was designed to investigate the incidence of accessory bones of the foot. METHODS: Anteroposterior and lateral foot radiographs of 464 male patients with an age range of 20 to 46 years were examined with regard to the presence, incidence, and distribution of accessory bones. Identification of the accessory bones were made according to the Kohler classification. RESULTS: Of 464 radiographs, accessory bones were identified in 85 feet (18.3%), all of which were symptomless. The most common accessory bones in descending order were os peroneum (31.8%), os naviculare (28.2%), os trigonum (23.5%), os vesalianum (5.9%), os supranaviculare (3.5%), os infranaviculare (3.5%), os supratalare (2.4%), and os intermetatarseum (1.2%). CONCLUSION: Accessory bones of the foot should be well recognized and their clinical significance should be appreciated in order to decrease the rate of incorrect diagnoses and unnecessary orthopedic consultations on initial presentations of patients with foot complaints.
Authors: O Kenechi Nwawka; Daichi Hayashi; Luis E Diaz; Ajay R Goud; William F Arndt; Frank W Roemer; Nagina Malguria; Ali Guermazi Journal: Insights Imaging Date: 2013-09-05