Skip to main content
Journal cover image

Fusion versus excision of the symptomatic Type II accessory navicular: a prospective study.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Scott, AT; Sabesan, VJ; Saluta, JR; Wilson, MA; Easley, ME
Published in: Foot Ankle Int
January 2009

BACKGROUND: Patients with symptomatic Type II accessory naviculars that fail nonoperative measures may be treated with excision, percutaneous drilling, a modified Kidner procedure, or a fourth option, arthrodesis of the accessory ossicle to the navicular body. There is little information in the literature on the relative merits of arthrodesis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective evaluation of 20 patients undergoing surgical intervention for symptomatic Type II accessory naviculars was performed. The decision to perform either an arthrodesis (10 feet) or a modified Kidner (10 feet) was made intraoperatively based on the size of the accessory ossicle. Outcomes were measured using pre- and postoperative American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) Midfoot scores, plain radiographs, and chart reviews. RESULTS: At an average followup of 35 months, the mean AOFAS score for the arthrodesis group improved from 50 to 93 points. There were two non-unions (20%) and one patient complained of painful hardware. At an average followup of 48 months, the mean AOFAS score for the modified Kidner group improved from 52 to 80 points. However, in this group, three of ten patients (30%) had persistent midfoot pain and radiographic evidence of progressive loss of the longitudinal arch. CONCLUSION: Although the methods do not represent a randomized comparison of treatments for the same condition, the results suggest that arthrodesis may be a reasonable treatment option in selected cases of patients with symptomatic recalcitrant Type II accessory naviculars that are large enough to accept small fragment screws.

Duke Scholars

Altmetric Attention Stats
Dimensions Citation Stats

Published In

Foot Ankle Int

DOI

ISSN

1071-1007

Publication Date

January 2009

Volume

30

Issue

1

Start / End Page

10 / 15

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Young Adult
  • Weight-Bearing
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Tarsal Joints
  • Tarsal Bones
  • Suture Anchors
  • Recovery of Function
  • Osteotomy
  • Orthopedics
  • Middle Aged
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Scott, A. T., Sabesan, V. J., Saluta, J. R., Wilson, M. A., & Easley, M. E. (2009). Fusion versus excision of the symptomatic Type II accessory navicular: a prospective study. Foot Ankle Int, 30(1), 10–15. https://doi.org/10.3113/FAI.2009.0010
Scott, Aaron T., Vani J. Sabesan, Jonathan R. Saluta, Melanie A. Wilson, and Mark E. Easley. “Fusion versus excision of the symptomatic Type II accessory navicular: a prospective study.Foot Ankle Int 30, no. 1 (January 2009): 10–15. https://doi.org/10.3113/FAI.2009.0010.
Scott AT, Sabesan VJ, Saluta JR, Wilson MA, Easley ME. Fusion versus excision of the symptomatic Type II accessory navicular: a prospective study. Foot Ankle Int. 2009 Jan;30(1):10–5.
Scott, Aaron T., et al. “Fusion versus excision of the symptomatic Type II accessory navicular: a prospective study.Foot Ankle Int, vol. 30, no. 1, Jan. 2009, pp. 10–15. Pubmed, doi:10.3113/FAI.2009.0010.
Scott AT, Sabesan VJ, Saluta JR, Wilson MA, Easley ME. Fusion versus excision of the symptomatic Type II accessory navicular: a prospective study. Foot Ankle Int. 2009 Jan;30(1):10–15.
Journal cover image

Published In

Foot Ankle Int

DOI

ISSN

1071-1007

Publication Date

January 2009

Volume

30

Issue

1

Start / End Page

10 / 15

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Young Adult
  • Weight-Bearing
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Tarsal Joints
  • Tarsal Bones
  • Suture Anchors
  • Recovery of Function
  • Osteotomy
  • Orthopedics
  • Middle Aged