Home
About Us
Issues
Authors
Reviewers
Users
Subscription
Our Other Journals
Site map
Aims and Scope
Salient Features
Editorial Board
Editorial Statements
Editorial-PeerReview Process
Publication Ethics & Malpractice
Publisher
Contact Us
Current Issue
Online Ahead of Print
Forthcoming
Article Archive
Access Statistics
Simple Search
Advanced Search
Submit an Article
Instructions
Assistance
Publication Fee
Paid Services
Apply As Reviewer
Acknowledgment
Register Here
Register For Article Submission
Login Here
Login For Article Submission
Annual
Buy One Issue
Payment Options
How to Order
JCDR
IJNMR
NJLM

 

Welcome : Guest

Users Online :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original article / research

Year : 2018 Month : October-December Volume : 7 Issue : 4 Page : RO06 - RO09

Radiological study of Os Navicular and its Anatomical Variants


Mallikarjun Ningappa Adibatti, Muthiah Pitchandi, Bhuvaneswari Venkatesan
1. Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, ESIC Medical College and PGIMSR, K K Nagar, Chennai, India. 2. Associate Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, ESIC Medical College and PGIMSR, K K Nagar Chennai, India. 3. Professor, Department of Radiodiagnosis, ESIC Medical College and PGIMSR, K K Nagar Chennai, India.
 
Correspondence Address :
Dr. Mallikarjun Ningappa Adibatti,
Assistant Professor, Department of Anatomy, ESIC
Medical College And PGIMSR, K K Nagar-600078,
Chennai, Tamilnadu, India.
E-mail: na_mallikarjun@rediffmail.com
 
ABSTRACT

: Accessory ossicles are the skeletal variations of the ankle and foot that can cause painful syndromes. Accessory navicular bone also known as Os Naviculare secundarium, Os tibiale externum, is one of the most common accessory ossicle of the foot with an incidence of 4–21%. The presence of an OSN can trigger various foot problems such as tibialis posterior tendon pathology, flattening of the medial longitudinal arch and medial foot pain.

Aim: To study the incidence, anatomical variants and distribution of Os Navicular (OSN).

Materials and Methods: Accessory navicular bones were retrospectively examined in 1,000 (589 men and 411 women) radiographs of foot in the age group 12-80 years. Anterior-posterior/oblique X-ray images were observed for the presence, anatomical variant, and morphology of OSN. All the data was recorded and analysed.

Results: Out of 1000 radiographs of the foot, 144 cases of OSN were observed with varying shape and size which accounts for 14.4% incidence. All three types of OSN were noted in the present study with Type II being the most predominant variant with incidence of 50%, while Type I with an incidence of 34.72% and Type III with an incidence of 15.27%.

Conclusion: Knowledge regarding the anatomical variants of OSN is important for surgeons and radiologists in the interpretation of foot radiographs and management of cases presenting with foot Pain.
Keywords : Medial longitudinal arch, Medial foot pain, Os tibiale externum, Tibialis posterior tendon pathology
 
INTRODUCTION

The accessory navicular, also known as ‘‘Os tibiale externum’’, ‘‘Os navicularum’’ or ‘‘prehallux’’, is a developmental variant within the foot appearing secondarily due to failed fusion from a secondary ossification center off the navicular (1),(2),(3),(4),(5). Os Navicular bone is the second most common ossicle of the foot which has an incidence of 4-28.3% in the general population (6),(7),(8). There is a strong female predominance and may be bilateral in 50% to 90% of cases (9). It is located on the postero-medial aspect of the foot adjacent to the posteromedial tuberosity of the navicular bone.

The accessory navicular has been associated with a normal foot posture and alignment, or sometimes with a flat (pes planus) foot. These usually remain asymptomatic, found incidentally on radiographs. They become symptomatic either due to trauma, degeneration, inflammation or infection of the feet. Accessory navicular bone has been commonly implicated as one of the cause for medial side foot pain, which when large can protrude medially and rub against footwear causing pain, which can be aggravated while walking, running and other weight bearing activities. It can also mimic a tarsal fracture.

Hence, knowledge regarding the presence, incidence, location and morphology of Os Navicular is important for the radiologists and orthopaedic surgeons to arrive at a correct diagnosis which aids in the management of cases presenting with foot trauma. Hence, the present radiographic study on Os Navicular of the foot was taken up in our institute.
 
MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective radiographic study of the incidence, anatomical variants & distribution of Os Navicular and accessory ossicles of the foot was conducted at Department of Radio-diagnosis ESIC Medical College & PGIMSR, K. K. Nagar, Chennai using radiographs of patients referred for X-rays of foot between January 2016-December 2017, after obtaining the permission from the Institutional Ethics Committee. Consecutive 1000 normal radiographs of the foot both anteroposterior & oblique views were used for the study which included both sexes and all age group between 12-80 years. Data collected by reading of both anteroposterior and oblique radiographs of the foot were recorded and analysed for the incidence, anatomical variants, location and distribution of Os Navicular bone in the foot. Radiographs of patients with incorrect patient positioning, fractures of bones of foot and radiographs with any deformity or pathology of the bones of feet were excluded from the study.

Statistical analysis

Statistical analysis was done by applying descriptive statistics. The categorical data is expressed in the manner of Percentage and presented by tables.
 
RESULTS

Out of 1000 radiographs of the foot, 144 cases of OSN were observed with varying shape and size which accounts for 14.4% incidence. OSN in the present study showed distinct margins with well corticated edges. Shape of the OSN observed in present study varied from small round, oval to triangular. Various anatomical variants such as bipartite (Table/Fig 1), tripartite (Table/Fig 2) OSN were also seen in the present study with an incidence of 2.08% and 0.69% respectively (Table/Fig 3). In the present study we noticed that, the location of OSN to be consistent with posteromedial aspect of the navicular bone. All three types of OSN as per Geist classification were noted in the present study with Type II (Table/Fig 4) being the most predominant variant with incidence of 50%, while Type I (Table/Fig 5) with an incidence of 34.72% and Type III (Table/Fig 6) with an incidence of 15.27%. (Table/Fig 7).
 
DISCUSSION

Sesamoid bone is a small rounded bone embedded within a tendon or joint capsule. Sesamoid bones are typically found in locations where a tendon passes over a joint. They prevent the friction between the tendon and the joint, protect the tendon and increase its biomechanical effect by changing the direction of pull of the tendon. On the other hand, accessory ossicles are usually derived from the failure of union of secondary ossification centres to the main bony mass (10),(11).

The accessory navicular was first described by Bauhin in 1605 as an autosomal dominant congenital anomaly in which a tuberosity develops from a secondary center of ossification (12),(14). Three types of accessory navicular bone have been classified by Geist in 1914 based on morphology (14). Type I is considered to be a sesamoid bone lying within the insertion of the tibialis posterior tendon. Type II results from a non fusion of secondary ossification center adjacent to the navicular bone; it is the insertion site of the posterior tibialis tendon and is connected to the navicular tuberosity by a synchondrosis. Type III accessory navicular bone is the result of fusion of the secondary ossification center with the navicular bone and is also called cornuate navicular (14).

Incidence of the Os Navicular varied from 4-28% (6),(7),(8), Coskun N et al., (1),(10) reported an incidence of 11% and 11.7% in two studies among Turkish population. Tsuruta T et al., (11) reported OSN to be present in 733 out of 3,460 feet with an incidence of 21.3%, Huang J et al., (3) reported an incidence of 20.2% (329 out 1625 cases), Heba K et al., (15) reported 20.9 %(259/1240cases), While in the present study we observed an incidence of 14.4%.

The incidence of various types of OSN such as Type I, Type II and Type III Os Navicular were reported by Coskun N et al., (1) as 3.3, 3.1, 4.6%, Huang J et al., (3) as 41.6, 36.8 and 21.6, Heba K et al., (15) reported 25.4%, 42.4% 32.0% respectively, but in the present study the incidence of Type I, Type II and Type III Os Navicular as 34.72 %, 50 % and15.27% respectively. It was observed that the Type II was the most predominant among the Types of OSN which correlates with the study of Heba K et al., (15), but Coskun N et al., (1) and Huang J et al., (3) reported Type III as predominant variant.

Accessory navicular is usually present as anatomical and radiological variant. But sometimes it may be the source of foot pain. The differential diagnosis for symptomatic accessory navicular is tarsal stress fractures, arthritis and posterior tibial tendon rupture (16). Out of these three patterns type II and cornuate navicular are associated with clinical manifestations particularly pain which is usually evident in second decade of life. When tibialis posterior tendon inserts either onto type II or III accessory navicular ossicle, the tendon is displaced resulting in valgus deformity which can later lead onto development of pes planus (17).

Painful accessory navicular may be due to trauma or degenerative changes at the synchondrosis or due to inflammation of soft tissue adjoining the bone (18).

Histopathology reveals inflammatory changes compatible with stress injuries. Continuous and vigorous movements of accessory navicular may traumatize leading to medial foot pain, which is more commonly seen in athletes.

Navicular in an intermediate tarsal bone located on the medial side of foot that articulates proximally with talus and distally with three cuneiform bones (19). Tibialis posterior is an invertor of foot which inserts into the navicular bone assisting in plantar flexion of foot at the ankle joint and also assists in maintaining the medial longitudinal arch of the foot (20),[ 21]. This can be compromised when tibialis posterior inserts to accessory navicular if present, leading to loss of suspension of the tibialis posterior tendon, ultimately leading to the development of pes planus deformity [ 21],(22),(23). However, there are no definitive cause and effect relationship between the accessory navicular and pes planus (24). Sullivan JA (25) has even reported that accessory navicular plays no role in the development of a flat foot.

LIMITATIONS

Morphology of the anatomical variants can be studied in detail using advanced imaging modalities such as CT and MRI.
 
CONCLUSION

Radiologists and surgeons must be aware of normal variants of OSN in order, not to interpret these ossicles as avulsion fractures or a reverse situation in which an avulsion fracture should not be confused and evaluated as an accessory ossicle. In symptomatic cases by recognising and treating this, progressive, debilitating deformity either conservatively or surgically, the surgeons will be able to resolve discomfort, improve dysfunction and restore quality of life of the patient.
 
REFERENCES
1.
Coskun N, Yuksel M, Cevener M, Arican RY, Ozdemir H, Bircan O, et al. Incidence of accessory ossicles and sesamoid bones in the feet: a radiographic study of the turkish subjects. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009;31(1):19-24.
2.
Coughlin M. Sesamoids and accessory bones of the foot. In: Coughlin M, Mann R, Saltzman C (eds) Surgery of the foot and ankle, 8th edn. Mosby, Philadelphia, PA,2007. Pp: 531-610.
3.
Huang J, Zhang Y, Ma X, Wang X, Zhang C, Chen L. Accessory navicular bone incidence in chinese patients: a retrospective analysis of X-rays following trauma or progressive pain onset. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36(2):167-72.
4.
Leonard ZC, Fortin PT. Adolescent accessory navicular. Foot Ankle Clin. 2010 Jun;15(2):337-47.
5.
Sarrafian S (1993) Osteology. In : Sarrafian SK (editors). Anatomy of the foot and ankle.2nd edition Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1993; pp 89–112.
6.
Mellado JM, Ramos A, Salvadó E, Camins A, Danús M, Saurí A.Accessory ossicles and sesamoid bones of the ankle and foot: imaging findings, clinical significance and differential diagnosis. Eur Radiol. 2003;13 Suppl 4:L164-77.
7.
Cilli F, Akçaoglu M. The incidence of accessory bones of the foot and their clinical significance. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc. 2005;39(3):243-46.
8.
Brown DD, Gumbs RV. Lisfranc fracture-dislocations: report of two cases. J Natl Med Assoc. 1991;83:366-69.
9.
Mosel LD, Kat E, Voyvodic F. Imaging of the symptomatic type II accessory navicular bone. Australas Radiol. 2004;48(2):267-71.
10.
Keles Coskun N, Arican RY, Utuk A, Ozcanli H, Sindel T. The incidence of accessory navicular bone types in Turkish subjects. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009;31(9):675-79.
11.
Tsuruta T, Shiokawa Y, Kato A, Matsumoto T, Yamazoe Y, Oike T, et al. Radiological study of the accessory skeletal elements in the foot and ankle. Nihon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi. 1981;55(4):357-70.
12.
Lawson JP, Ogden JA, Sella E, Barwick KW. The Painful Accessory Navicular. Skeletal Radiol. 1984;12(4):250-62.
13.
Miller TT1, Staron RB, Feldman F, Parisien M, Glucksman WJ, Gandolfo LH. The symptomatic accessory tarsal navicular bone: assessment with MR imaging. Radiology. 1995;195(3):849-53.
14.
Perdikakis E, Grigoraki E, Karantanas A. Os naviculare: the multi-ossicle configuration of a normal variant. Skeletal Radiol. 2011;40(1):85-88.
15.
Kalbouneh H, Alajoulin O, Alsalem M, Humoud N, Shawaqfeh J, Alkhoujah M, et al. Incidence and anatomical variations of accessory navicular bone in patients with foot pain: A retrospective radiographic analysis. Clin Anat. 2017;30(4):436-44.
16.
Dr SA Schumacher, Pediatric Corporation. “Accessory Navicular. The Achilles Foot Health center, retrieved from online literature. www.FootDoc.ca
17.
Resnick D. Diagnosis of Bones and joint disorders. WB Saunders. Philadephia. 3rd edition: 1995. Pp: 4275-81.
18.
Sella EJ, Lawson JP, Ogten JA. Accessory Navicular Synchondrosis. Clin Orthop. 1986;(209):280-85
19.
D.Richard, V.Wayne, M. Adam, Gray’s Anatomy for Students. Churchill Livingstone: Elsevier Publishers, 2010;2st ed. Pp: 604.
20.
Golano P, Fariñas O, Sáenz I. The anatomy of the navicular and periarticular structures. Foot Ankle Clin. 2004 Mar;9(1):01-23
21.
Kiter E, Erdag N, Karatosun V, Günal I. Tibialis posterior tendon abnormalities in feet with accessory navicular bone and flatfoot. Acta Orthop Scand. 1999 Dec;70(6):618-21.
22.
Kulkarni. G.S. Textbook of orthopedics and trauma. India: Jaypee Brother Publication, 1999. Pp: 3013-20.
23.
Kidner FC. The pre hallux (accessory scaphoid) in its relation to flat-foot. J Bone Joint Surg. 1929;11(4):831-37.
24.
Kidner FC. Pre-hallux in relation to flatfoot. JAMA. 1933;101:1539-42.
25.
Sullivan JA, Miller WA. The relationship of the accessory navicular to the development of the flat foot. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;(144):233-37.
 
TABLES AND FIGURES
[Table / Fig - 1]  [Table / Fig - 2]  [Table / Fig - 3]  [Table / Fig - 4]  [Table / Fig - 5]  [Table / Fig - 6]  [Table / Fig - 7]
 
 
 

In This Article

  • Abstract
  • Material and Methods
  • Results
  • Discussion
  • Conclusion
  • References

Article Utilities

  • Readers Comments
  • Article in PDF
  • Citation Manager
  • How to Cite
  • Article Statistics
  • Link to PUBMED
  • Print this Article
  • Send to a Friend

Quick Links

REVIEWER
ACCESS STATISTICS
Home  |  About Us  |  Online First  |  Current Issue  |  Simple Search  |  Advance Search  |  Register  |  Login  |  Contact  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Author Support  |  Submit Manuscript  |  IJARS Pre-Publishing  |  Reviewer  |  Articles Archive  |  Access Statistics
© 2025 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANATOMY RADIOLOGY & SURGERY (IJARS), ISSN : 2277-8543.
EDITORIAL OFFICE : 1/9, Roop Nagar, Delhi 11000. Phone : 01123848553

* This Journal is owned and run by medical professionals *