II型痛性足副舟骨影像学诊断价值

摘要
图/表
参考文献
相关文章 (15)

全文: PDF (1348 KB) HTML (1 KB)
输出: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

摘要目的：评价X线、CT、MRI、超声对II型痛性足副舟骨（PANB）的诊断价值。方法：回顾性分析42例经手术确诊的45侧II型PANB的X线、CT、MRI以及超声影像诊断资料，比较四者诊断PANB的敏感度及测量准确性。结果：X线、CT、MRI、超声诊断II型PANB的敏感度分别为68.9%（31/45）、88.9%（40/45）、
95.6%（43/45）、91.1%（41/45）。X线的敏感度低于CT、MRI及超声，差异均有统计学意义（均P＜0.05）。CT、MRI及超声诊断II型PANB敏感度较高，三者间差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）。X线、CT、MRI、超声对诊断阳性患者副骨最大径值测量结果分别为（11.5±6.6）mm、（9.5±7.3）mm、（9.3±7.1）mm、（11.8±6.8）mm，四者间差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）。结论：X线检查诊断II型PANB敏感度相对不足；CT敏感度高但对软组织成像效果欠佳；MRI敏感度最高，且可以显示骨髓水肿和软组织病变，应用价值高但价格昂贵；超声诊断敏感度高，可显示副骨、纤维连接处和软组织病变，可进行动态多角度扫查，且经济方便，可作为首选筛查方法。

	服务
	把本文推荐给朋友
	加入我的书架
	加入引用管理器
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	作者相关文章
	陈仕宇
	臧国礼
	许伟莹
	胡闽
	徐庆
	赵佳
	王接丰

关键词 ：足副舟骨, 足, 疼痛, 超声, 磁共振成像, 诊断

Abstract：Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic value of X-ray, CT, MRI and ultrasonography in type II painful accessory navicular bone (PANB). Methods: The X-ray, CT, MRI, and ultrasonic diagnostic data of 45 cases (from 42 patients) of type II PANB were retrospectively analyzed. The sensitivity and accuracy of PANB were compared between the four groups. Results: The sensitivity of X-ray, CT, MRI, ultrasonography diagnosis of type II PANB was 68.9% (31/45), 88.9% (40/45), 95.6% (43/45), 91.1% (41/45), respectively. The sensitivity of X-ray was lower than that of CT, MRI and ultrasonography, with statistical difference (P<0.05). The sensitivity of CT, MRI and ultrasonography in diagnosing type II PANB was high and there was no significant difference between them (P>0.05). The maximum diameter of positive cases measured respectively by X-ray, CT, MRI and ultrasonography was (11.5±6.6)mm, (9.5±7.3)mm, (9.3±7.1)mm, (11.8±6.8)mm, with no statistically significant difference between all groups (P>0.05). Conclusion: X-ray is less sensitive to the diagnosis of type II PANB. CT has higher sensitivity, but its imaging capability of soft tissue is poor. MRI has the highest sensitivity and can display the bone marrow edema and soft tissue lesions, but it costs more; Ultrasonography diagnosis, being highly sensitive, able to find the accessory bone, the fibrous junction and soft tissue lesions, can be used for dynamic multi angle scanning. In addition, ultrasonography is more convenient and less expensive. Therefore, it is a recommended screening method.

Key words： accessory navicular bone foot pain ultrasonography magnetic resonance imaging diagnosis

收稿日期: 2018-06-21

基金资助:温州市医药卫生科学研究计划项目（2018B34）。

作者简介: 陈仕宇（1988-），男，浙江乐清人，主治医师。

链接本文:

https://xb.wmu.edu.cn/CN/ 或 https://xb.wmu.edu.cn/CN/Y2019/V49/I5/356

[1] PARK H, HWANG J H, SEO J O, et al. The relationship between accessory navicular and flat foot: A radiologic study [J]. J Pediatr Orthop, 2015, 35(7): 739-745.
[2] CHEONG I Y, KANG H J, KO H, et al. Genetic influence on accessory navicular bone in the foot: A Korean twin and family study[J]. Twin Res Hum Genet, 2017, 20(3): 236-241.
[3] MOSEL L D, KAT E, VOYVODIC F. Imaging of symptomatic type II accessory navicular bone[J]. Australas Radiol, 2004, 48(2): 267-271.
[4] KITER E, ERDAG N, KARATTOSUN V, et al. Tibialis posterior tendon abnormalities in feet with accessory navicular bone and platfoot[J]. Acta Orthop Scand, 1999, 70(6): 618-621.
[5] MILLER T T. Painful accessory bones of the foot[J]. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol, 2002, 6(2): 153-161.
[6] KALBOUNEH H, ALAJOULIN O, ALSALEM M, et al. Incidence and anatomical variations of accessory navicular bone in patients with footpain: A retrospective radiographic analysis[J]. Clin Anat, 2017, 30(4): 436-444.
[7] 张存, 俞光荣. 痛性足副舟骨诊断和治疗进展[J]. 国际骨科学杂志, 2011, 32(6): 360-363.
[8] 解冰, 田竞, 刘欣伟, 等. 副舟骨融合术治疗成人II型痛性足副舟骨临床疗效分析[J]. 中国骨伤, 2014, 27(10): 870-873.
[9] SENSES I, KITER E, GUNAL I. Restoring the continuity of the tibialis posterior tendon in the treatment of symptomatic accessory navicular with flat feet[J]. J Orthop Sci, 2004, 9(4): 408-409.
[10] LIU T H. Endoscopic accessory navicular synchondrosis fusion[J]. Arthrosc Tech, 2016, 5(6): e1267-e1272.
[11] LEONARD Z C, FORTIN P T. Adolescent accessory navicular, Foot Ankle Clin[J]. 2010, 15(2): 337-347.
[12] 胡觉清. 足副舟骨扭伤的影像学特征[J]. 临床军医杂志, 2013, 41(10): 1064-1065, 1076.
[13] JOHNSON T R, STEINBACH L S. Accessory navicular[A]. In: Johnson TR, Steinbach LS eds. Essentials of Musculoskeletal Imaging[M]. Rosemont: AAOS, 2004, 574-576.
[14] CHOI Y S, LEE K T, KANG H S, et al. MR imaging findings of painful type II accessory navicular bone: Correlation with surgical and pathologic studies[J]. Korean J Radiol, 2004, 5(4): 274-279.
[15] CHUANG Y W, TSAI W S, CHEN K H, et al. Clinical use of high-resolution ultrasonography for the diagnosis of type II accessory navicular bone[J]. Am J Phys Med Rehabil, 2012, 91(2): 177-181.
[16] 胡闽, 臧国礼, 陈仕宇. 超声诊断儿童痛性足副舟骨1例[J]. 中国医学影像学杂志, 2018, 26(2): 146-147.
[17] CHIU N T, JOU I M, LEE B F, et al. Symptomatic and asymptomatic accessory navicular bones: findings of Tc-99M MDP bone scintigraphy[J]. Clin Radiol, 2000, 55(5): 353-355.
[18] CHONG A, HA J M, LEE J Y. Clinical meaning of hot uptake on bone scan in symptomatic accessory navicular bones [J]. Nucl Med Mol Imaging, 2016, 50(4): 322-328.
[19] HUANG J, ZHANG Y, MA X, et al. Accessory navicular bone incidence in Chinese patients: a retrospective analysis of X-rays following trauma or progressive pain onset[J].Surg Radiol Anat, 2014, 36(2): 167-172.