Navicular Fracture

Monteagudo, Manuel; Martínez-de-Albornoz, Pilar

doi:10.1016/j.fcl.2021.11.024

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Sangeorzan classified navicular fractures into four main types based on the direction of the fracture line, the direction of foot displacement, and the involvement of the surrounding joints: navicular tuberosity fracture, navicular avulsion fracture, navicular stress fracture, and navicular body fracture, and further subdivided the navicular body fracture into three types (7). Avulsion fractures of the navicular bone account for about 50% of the four types of navicular fractures, and other types of high-energy injuries such as traffic accidents and falls are becoming more frequent (3,4,(8)(9)(10). Schmid classified the fractures of the navicular bone into types 1 to 3 according to the degree of involvement of the talocalcaneal joint, referring to fractures of both parts of the navicular body, comminuted fractures and dislocation of the periprosthetic joint/talar head fractures, respectively (11).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tarsal navicular fractures are uncommon, with fractures in this region accounting for approximately 0.45% of systemic fractures, 5.1% of all foot fractures, and 35% of all midfoot fractures ( 1 , 2 ). The navicular bone carries most of the axial load during hindfoot movement and is therefore an important component of not only the Chopart joint but also a key structure in the medial column of the midfoot ( 3 , 4 ). The navicular bone is often susceptible to shear forces resulting in fractures due to insufficient blood supply in the middle third of the navicular body and violent conduction of the attached soft tissues such as the talofibular ligament, part of the deltoid ligament, and the posterior tibial tendon ( 5 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Schmid classified the fractures of the navicular bone into types 1 to 3 according to the degree of involvement of the talocalcaneal joint, referring to fractures of both parts of the navicular body, comminuted fractures and dislocation of the periprosthetic joint/talar head fractures, respectively ( 11 ). CT examinations can better demonstrate the type of fracture, the extent of articular surface destruction and the remaining combined injuries, while excluding pars distalis and anatomic variants ( 4 , 12 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Displaced navicular fractures, navicular body fractures, and combined talocrural and navicular-cuneiform joint destruction require consideration of surgical treatment ( 4 ). The treatment of navicular fractures include Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and closed reduction internal fixation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the complex anatomy of the navicular bone and the narrow space for internal fixation placement, achieving accurate percutaneous screw internal fixation of navicular fractures is not an easy task. The current problems lie in the lack of repositioning precision, high experience requirements, and long learning curve ( 3 , 4 , 10 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Robot-assisted percutaneous screw fixation in the treatment of navicular fracture

Wang

Fu²,

Li³

et al. 2023

Front. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundLong recovery time, large scar, postoperative swelling and pain are possible side effects of open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) for tarsal navicular fractures. Early exercise instruction is made possible by the use of an intraoperative robot-assisted percutaneous invasive closed reduction internal fixation. The goal of the trial was to determine whether percutaneous screw internal fixation with robot assistance might be used to treat navicular fractures.Methods27 patients with navicular fractures had surgical treatment between June 2019 and December 2021. Of those, 20 instances were treated with ORIF, while 7 cases had robot-assisted percutaneous screw internal fixation. At the final follow-up, the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) hindfoot score and the visual analogue scale (VAS) score were compared to determine outcomes and function.ResultsFollow-up was obtained in all 27 patients after surgery, with a mean follow-up time of 21.81 months, ranging from 15 to 29 months . In the 7 instances of robot-assisted group, percutaneous guide wire insertion and screw placement only needed one attempt and the depth and position of the implant were both satisfactory. In the ORIF group, there were two patients who sustained cutaneous nerve injuries. The AOFAS score and the VAS score of the group receiving robot-assisted navigation percutaneous screw fixation were 92.25 ± 2.22 and 0.75 ± 0.25 respectively at the last follow-up, while 82.25 ± 7.15 and 0.50 ± 0.29 were the respective values for the ORIF group.ConclusionIntraoperative robot-assisted percutaneous closed reduction internal fixation for tarsal navicular fractures can accomplish exact localization of fracture site, reduce soft tissue damage and operative time. According to current view, this method offers fewer complications, a faster recovery after surgery, and more patient satisfaction.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Robot-assisted percutaneous screw fixation in the treatment of navicular fracture

Wang

Fu²,

Li³

et al. 2023

Front. Surg.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Imaging of Müller-Weiss Disease

Carrascoso

Rosa

Llopis

et al. 2023

Semin Musculoskelet Radiol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Müller-Weiss disease (MWD) is the result of a dysplasia of the tarsal navicular bone. Over the adult years, the dysplastic bone leads to the development of an asymmetric talonavicular arthritis with the talar head shifting laterally and plantarly, thus driving the subtalar joint into varus. From a diagnostic point of view, the condition may be difficult to differentiate from an avascular necrosis or even a stress fracture of the navicular, but fragmentation is the result of a mechanical impairment rather than a biological dysfunction.Standardized weight-bearing radiographs (anteroposterior and lateral views) of both feet are usually enough to diagnose MWD. Other imaging modalities such as multi-detector computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in early cases for the differential diagnosis can add additional details on the amount of cartilage affected, bone stock, fragmentation, and associated soft tissue injuries. Failure to identify patients with paradoxical flatfeet varus may lead to an incorrect diagnosis and management. Conservative treatment with the use of rigid insoles is effective in most patients. A calcaneal osteotomy seems to be a satisfactory treatment for patients who fail to respond to conservative measures and a good alternative to the different types of peri-navicular fusions. Weight-bearing radiographs are also useful to identify postoperative changes.

show abstract

Navicular Fracture

Cited by 2 publications

References 53 publications

Robot-assisted percutaneous screw fixation in the treatment of navicular fracture

Robot-assisted percutaneous screw fixation in the treatment of navicular fracture

Imaging of Müller-Weiss Disease

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About