Literature DB >> 27090634

Accessory Navicular Syndrome in Athlete vs General Population.

Hyuk Jegal1, Young Uk Park2, Jin Su Kim3, Ho Sik Choo4, Young Uk Seo4, Kyung Tai Lee1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic accessory navicular syndrome (ANS) typically develops in young athletes. The symptoms are exacerbated during exercise or while walking, affecting the sports performance of athletes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiologic findings and clinical course in athletes with accessory navicular syndrome (ANS) in comparison with a nonathletic population.
METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with ANS between August 2012 and August 2013 were included. Overall, 29 were athletes and 50 were not athletes, and 19 (2 athletes and 17 nonathletes) of them improved after at least 6 months of conservative treatment. The records of 60 patients (64 consecutive feet) of ANS treated by modified Kidner operation were evaluated retrospectively. The study population included 27 athletes (31 feet) and 33 nonathletes (33 feet). Clinical features and radiologic findings were compared between them.
RESULTS: Overall, 34% of the nonathletes improved after conservative treatment, but only 6.9% of athletes improved (P < .001). Mean age at surgery in the athlete group was 16.1 years (range, 12-26), and 24.3 years (range, 12-52) in the nonathlete group (P < .001). There was a history of trauma in 23 feet (74%) of the athlete group and in 13 feet (39%) of the nonathlete group (P = .006). Eighteen feet (58%) in the athlete group and 11 feet (32%) in the nonathlete group showed movement between the 2 bones (P = .047). Bone marrow edema was observed in both navicular and accessory navicular in all of the athletes (27/27, 100%). But it was only present in 80% (16/20) for nonathletes (P = .012).
CONCLUSION: The radiologic findings and clinical course of athletes were different from that of the general population. Their symptoms were more refractory to conservative treatment than the nonathletes group. Therefore, early operative treatment could be considered in cases of symptomatic ANS especially for athletes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative case series.
© The Author(s) 2016.

Entities:  

Keywords:  accessory navicular syndrome; athletic performance; midfoot

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27090634     DOI: 10.1177/1071100716644791

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Foot Ankle Int        ISSN: 1071-1007            Impact factor:   2.827


  6 in total

1.  Painful type II os naviculare: introduction of a standardized, reproducible classification system.

Authors:  Sarah I Kamel; Jeffrey A Belair; Tarek M Hegazi; Ethan J Halpern; Vishal Desai; William B Morrison; Adam C Zoga
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 2.199

2.  How to increase the accuracy of the diagnosis of the accessory bone of the foot?

Authors:  Paweł Szaro; Mateusz Polaczek; Jan Świątkowski; Hanna Kocoń
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2019-11-23       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  Effectiveness of Nonoperative Treatment of the Symptomatic Accessory Navicular in Pediatric Patients.

Authors:  Malynda Wynn; Candice Brady; Kristin Cola; Jaime Rice-Denning
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2019

4.  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

5.  The tibialis posterior tendon footprint: an anatomical dissection study.

Authors:  Madeleine Willegger; Nargiz Seyidova; Reinhard Schuh; Reinhard Windhager; Lena Hirtler
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 2.303

6.  [Application of modified internal fixation and fusion for type painful accessory navicular in adults].

Authors:  Weixin Zheng; Yan Zhang; Jingqi Liang; Hongmou Zhao; Xiaojun Liang
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2019-12-15
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.