Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35776339›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2022

Assessing the Outcomes Associated with Accessory Navicular Bone Surgery-a Systematic Review.

Sajid Wariach, Kunwar Karim, Mohamed Sarraj, Karim Gaber, Amardeep Singh, Waleed Kishta

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sajid WariachDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada. sajidwariach7@hotmail.com.
Kunwar KarimDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Mohamed SarrajDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Karim GaberDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mansoura International Hospital, Mansoura, Egypt.
Amardeep SinghDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
Waleed KishtaDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, McMaster University, 1280 Main St W, Hamilton, ON, L8S 4L8, Canada.
McMaster University · CAMansoura University Hospital · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe purpose of this review is to evaluate the existing literature in order to compare the clinical outcomes and complications associated with the kidner procedure and simple excision procedure. Furthermore, this review will help determine if one procedure is advantageous over the other in treating accessory navicular among patients. RECENT

findingsPrevious research on this topic has seen a low success rate in treating patients with symptomatic accessory navicular using conservative treatment options such as shoe-wear modification, braces, and/or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory. Surgical treatment such as simple excision and kidner procedure has shown to have minor complications including scarring and wound irritation with a generally high satisfaction rate from patients. However, cases where patients that had planovalgus or hindfoot valgus accompanying the accessory navicular were required to undergo revision surgery to treat the recurrent pain following the kidner procedure. Similarly, patients that underwent simple excision procedure with having flat foot were unable to complete the heel test postoperatively despite not reporting feelings of pain. Both simple excision and the Kidner procedure appear to be efficacious procedures with low complication profiles and high rates of patient satisfaction. Moreover, it has appeared that the female demographic is more likely to present symptomatic accessory navicular and undergo surgical treatment. To further explore the ideal indication for each, more prospective comparative studies are needed as well as radiological assessments pre- and post-operatively to evaluate anatomical changes in the posterior tibialis tendon area between both procedures.

Indexed as

Accessory navicularClinical outcomesComplicationsKidnerSimple excision

Identifiers

PMID35776339
PMCPMC9463416
OpenAlexW4283758853

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.