First Metatarsal Bilateral Stress Fracture: A Case Report.
Stress fracture
first metatarsal
pulsed electromagnetic fields
Journal
Journal of orthopaedic case reports
ISSN: 2250-0685
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Case Rep
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101641392
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Feb 2023
Feb 2023
Historique:
received:
10
11
2022
revised:
18
12
2022
medline:
5
5
2023
pubmed:
5
5
2023
entrez:
5
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Metatarsal stress fractures typically occur in the second and third metatarsus metaphysis, with only rare cases in the fourth and first. The main factors influencing its onset are repetitive stress from prolonged training, biomechanical factors and bone weakness. There is only a paucity of literature documenting first metatarsal stress fractures; the authors present a rare bilateral first metatarsal stress fracture. A Caucasian 52-years-old amateur female runner with no other risk factors or medical condition was admitted in our institute with complaints of severe bilateral forefoot pain for 2 weeks arisen after a 20 km run of an amateur race. The patient presented bilateral hallux valgus (HVA) and advanced osteoarthritis of the first metatarsal-phalangeal joint, which is not usually considered a biomechanical risk factor for metatarsal stress fractures. Radiographs of both feet showed linear sclerosis, perpendicular to the diaphysis of the first metatarsal, approximatively in the half of the bone. Signs of osteoarthritis of the first metatarsal-phalangeal were also detected bilaterally.The patient was treated with rest, bilateral post-operative rocker sole shoes that she has worn for 6 weeks, cryotherapy, analgesics as needed and pulsed electromagnetic fields for 8 h per day for 40 days with a complete resolution of symptoms and the previous radiological findings. The authors believed that the bilateral HVA condition could be considered an indirect sign of overuse, and it may be investigated and eventually treated as a responsible for this pathologic condition.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37144074
doi: 10.13107/jocr.2023.v13.i02.3546
pii: JOCR-13-34
pmc: PMC10152933
doi:
Types de publication
Case Reports
Langues
eng
Pagination
34-37Informations de copyright
Copyright: © Indian Orthopaedic Research Group.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of Interest: Nil
Références
Foot Ankle Int. 2007 Apr;28(4):506-10
pubmed: 17475148
Int J Sports Med. 1987 Jun;8(3):221-6
pubmed: 3623785
Injury. 2004 Sep;35 Suppl 2:SB77-86
pubmed: 15315882
Am J Sports Med. 2001 May-Jun;29(3):304-10
pubmed: 11394600
Clin Sports Med. 2008 Apr;27(2):321-8
pubmed: 18346546
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1991 Apr;72(4):847-53
pubmed: 2005212
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1978 Apr;130(4):679-81
pubmed: 416678
Skeletal Radiol. 2017 Sep;46(9):1165-1186
pubmed: 28343329
Phys Sportsmed. 2005 Oct;33(10):50-8
pubmed: 20086336
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 1991 Mar;23(3):298-303
pubmed: 2020267
Bone. 2005 Aug;37(2):253-60
pubmed: 15963776
J Fam Pract. 1994 Mar;38(3):238-44
pubmed: 8126403
Foot Ankle Int. 1997 Jun;18(6):373-4
pubmed: 9208299
Br J Sports Med. 2007 Aug;41(8):510-4
pubmed: 17339282
Foot Ankle Int. 2006 Sep;27(9):750-7
pubmed: 17038292
Clin Sports Med. 2014 Oct;33(4):591-613
pubmed: 25280611
Phys Sportsmed. 2014 Nov;42(4):87-99
pubmed: 25419892
Skeletal Radiol. 1999 Dec;28(12):679-84
pubmed: 10653362
Foot Ankle Int. 1994 Jul;15(7):349-53
pubmed: 7951968
J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 2015 Mar;105(2):177-80
pubmed: 25815658