Imaging Findings of CT and MRI of Os Supratalare: A Case Report

Kim, Seon Jeong; Kim, Okhwa

doi:10.3348/jksr.2013.69.4.317

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 6 publications

(9 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A few studies focusing on os supratalare have been published [ 2 ]. Although os supratalare is usually asymptomatic, Kim, et al reported a symptomatic case with a hard bump and dorsal hind foot pain [ 37 ]. It can also cause pain or degenerative changes in response to over use and trauma.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Keles-Celik¹,

Köse

Şekerci³

et al. 2017

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accessory ossicles of the foot and ankle are normal variants of bone development that usually remain asymptomatic. However, they may be involved in various disorders and become a source of pain such as in fractures, dislocations, degenerative changes, osteonecrosis, osteoarthritis, osteochondral lesions, avascular necrosis, and irritation or impingement of adjacent soft tissues. Hence, during the assessment of the situations above, knowledge about these little-known ossicles could be very important to reach the correct diagnosis. Recent studies in the literature have mostly focused on the most frequent 9-12 accessory bones. In this review, 24 types of accessory ossicle are described. These ossicles are accessory navicular bone, os peroneum, os trigonum, os intermetatarseum, os vesalianum. os subfibulare, os subtibiale, os calcaneus secundarius, os calcanei accessorium, os supratalare, os sustentaculi, os talotibiale, os tali accessorium, talus secundarius, os subcalcis, os cuboideum secundarium, os supranaviculare, os infranaviculare, os paracuneiforme, os intercuneiforme, os cuneometatarsale I tibiale, os cuneometatarsale plantare, os cuneo–I metatarsale-II dorsale, and os aponeurosis plantaris. The clinical importance of these bones should be known thoroughly to reduce unnecessary orthopedic consultations and misdiagnosis. This article describes the clinical importance of the accessory ossicles and their possible pathological conditions. Understanding the possible disorders of the accessory ossicles of the foot and ankle can provide a more accurate diagnostic process.

show abstract

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Keles-Celik¹,

Köse

Şekerci³

et al. 2017

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…3 The os supratalare usually remains asymptomatic; however, it can also cause pain or degenerative changes in response to overuse and trauma. 9,15 Therefore, its prevalence should be known.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Prevalence of Accessory Ossicles, Sesamoid Bones, and Biphalangism of the Foot and Ankle: A Radiographic Study

Candan

Torun

Dikici

2022

Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Accessory ossicles, sesamoid bones, and biphalangism of toes are the most common developmental variations of the foot. These bones may be associated with painful syndromes; however, their clinical importance is not well understood because the reported prevalence varies widely. Therefore, we aimed to investigate these variants in Turkish subjects. Methods: A total of 1651 foot radiographs were retrospectively assessed. Radiographs of feet were examined regarding the prevalence, sex, and bilaterality of accessory ossicles, sesamoid bones, and biphalangism in Turkish subjects. Results: Accessory ossicles (26.1%) and sesamoid bones (8%) were detected. The most common accessory ossicles were os trigonum (9.8%), accessory navicular bone (7.9%), and os peroneum (5.8%). Also, we detected os supratalare (0.48%), os calcanei secundarium (0.42%) os subfibulare (0.42%), os supranaviculare (0.36%), os vesalianum (0.30%), os subtibiale (0.24%), os intermetatarseum (0.12%), and os subcalcis (0.12%). We observed bipartite hallux sesamoid in 1.8% and interphalangeal sesamoid bone of the hallux in 0.7% of radiographs. Incidences of metatarsophalangeal sesamoid bones were found as 0.6%, 0.06%, 0.6%, and 5.8% in the second, third, fourth, and fifth digit, respectively. We observed biphalangeal toe in 0.5%, 1.7%, 3.5%, and 37.6% in the second, third, fourth, and fifth toe, respectively. Conclusion: This study is the first detailed report on the incidence of the most common variants of the foot and ankle in a wide-ranging patients’ series in Turkish subjects. Our study’s findings will contribute to reducing misdiagnosis. Clinical Relevance: The results of this study may provide anatomical data that could help clinicians in the diagnosis and management of disorders that present with pain and discomfort in the feet. Knowledge of these variants is important to prevent misinterpreting them as fractures.

show abstract