Anatomical variation in the ankle and foot: from incidental finding to inductor of pathology. Part II: midfooot and forefoot

Abstract

Accessory anatomical structures in the ankle and foot usually represent incidental imaging findings; however, they may also eventually represent a source of pathology, such as painful syndromes, degenerative changes, be the subject of overuse and trauma, or appear as masses and cause compression syndromes or impingement. This review aims to describe and illustrate the imaging findings related to the presence of accessory ossicles and muscles in the midfoot and forefoot through different techniques, with special attention on those variants that associate factors of clinical relevance or that would trigger challenges in the differential diagnosis.

Prevalence of Sesamoids and Accessory ossicles of the Foot: A Radiographic study of the Indian population and a literature review

“…[4,6,8] The reported prevalence in literature is between 4 and 21%. [3] Our study results show prevalence is 13.06% {Table 2}, which is in the range of reported prevalence in the literature. East et al estimated prevalence is 5.8%, and the frequency is higher in females than males.…”

“…[4,5] Usually, asymptomatic, serious associated pathology is irreducible dislocated IP joint due to its interposition. [3,4] Nigar et al reported prevalence of interphalangeal joint sesamoid was ~ 2% [5%]. Our study shows a 5.2 % {Table 1, Figure 1 (f)}, prevalence higher than the reported prevalence in Nigar study done in Turkish subjects.…”

“…The reported prevalence of Type I was ~ 30% in the literature review. [3] Our study shows 5.32%, and male (5.56%) than female (4.48%). reported prevalence of Type II was ~ 50-90% in the literature review.…”

“…A common pitfall is bipartite hallux is confused with the fracture hallux. [3,6] A lesser metatarsal sesamoid is located in the metatarsal head's plantar aspect, [4,5] embedded within the joint capsule.…”

“…Usually asymptomatic, very rarely, infections may spread from the adjacent soft tissue. [3,4] Nigar et al reported prevalence of 2nd and 5th lesser metatarsal sesamoid was 0.4% and 4.3%, respectively. [5] Our study shows a majority of 0.39% and 3.68% {Table 1, Figure 1 (d, e)}, similar to the Nigar's study on the Turkish subject.…”