ArticleCureus2023
Symptomatic Patient With Two Separate Accessory Navicular Bones.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Coexistence of Tripartite Accessory Navicular Bone and Os Subfibulare.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present the case of a symptomatic patient with two separate accessory navicular bones, a novel finding that does not fall within current classification standards. Furthermore, there is a paucity of current literature with regard to the management of symptomatic cases. Accessory navicular bones, sometimes referred to as os naviculare, are ossicles that can occur in multiple configurations and are considered developmental anomalies. The accessory navicular is an accessory bone found on the medial side of the navicular bone of the foot. While often asymptomatic, they can occasionally lead to clinically significant pain and/or deformity that can cause patients to seek out treatment and sometimes surgical correction. Diagnosis relies on clinical suspicion and imaging studies. A nine-year-old female patient presented initially with complaints of sharp pain over the medial side of her left foot, after which X-rays were obtained that demonstrated an accessory navicular bone. Upon diagnosis, conservative measures were implemented, including placing the patient in a short-leg cast with limited activity. After a failed trial of conservative measures, the patient underwent surgical excision of the accessory navicular bone, with imaging and intraoperative findings of two separate accessory navicular bones, a unique finding in patients with accessory navicular bones. During the six-week follow-up, the patient improved with no new complaints or concerns and was informed she could begin weight-bearing as tolerated with two crutches; she was then weaned from the crutches and returned to normal activity. In the current case, we followed the same route of treatment used to treat a single accessory navicular bone, utilizing first non-surgical interventions and then ultimately surgical excision after continual pain despite conservative measures. This case highlights the promising outcome for a patient with two separate accessory navicular bones when following the guidelines for the treatment of a single accessory navicular bone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.