advertising
-
1
Kane JM, Sandrowski K, Saffel H, et al.: The epidemiology of fifth metatarsal fracture. Foot Ankle Spec 8: 354, 2015.
-
2
Lawrence SJ, Botte MJ: Jones’ fractures and related fractures of the proximal fifth metatarsal. Foot Ankle 14: 358, 1993.
-
3
Egol K, Walsh M, Rosenblatt K, et al.: Avulsion fractures of the fifth metatarsal base: a prospective outcome study. Foot Ankle Int 28: 581, 2007.
-
4
Morris PM, Francois AG, Marcus RE, et al.: The effect of peroneus brevis tendon anatomy on the stability of fractures at the fifth metatarsal base. Foot Ankle Int 36: 579, 2015.
-
5
Zwitser EW, Breederveld RS: Fractures of the fifth metatarsal; diagnosis and treatment. Injury 41: 555, 2010.
-
6
Gray AC, Rooney BP, Ingram R: A prospective comparison of two treatment options for tuberosity fractures of the proximal fifth metatarsal. Foot (Edinb) 18: 156, 2008.
-
7
Sarmiento A: A functional below-the-knee cast for tibial fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am 49: 855, 1967.
-
8
Richter M, Zech S, Gearing J, et al.: A new foot and ankle outcome score: questionnaire based, subjective, visual analogue scale, validated and computerised. Foot Ankle Surg 12: 191, 1996.
-
9
Quill GE Jr: Fractures of the proximal fifth metatarsal. Orthop Clin North Am 26: 353, 1995.
-
10
Wiener BD, Linder JF, Giattini JF: Treatment of fractures of the fifth metatarsal: a prospective study. Foot Ankle Int 18: 267, 1997.
-
11
Shahid MK, Punwar S, Boulind C, et al.: Aircast walking boot and below-knee walking cast for avulsion fractures of the base of the fifth metatarsal: a comparative cohort study. Foot Ankle Int 34: 75, 2013.
-
12
Akimau PI, Cawthron KL, Dakin WM, et al.: Symptomatic treatment or cast immobilisation for avulsion fractures of the base of the fifth metatarsal: a prospective, randomised, single-blinded non-inferiority controlled trial. Bone Joint J 98-B: 806, 2016.
-
13
Zenios M, Kim WY, Sampath J, et al.: Functional treatment of acute metatarsal fractures: a prospective randomised comparison of management in a cast versus elasticated support bandage. Injury 36: 832, 2005.
-
14
Gosele A, Schulenburg J, Oschsner PE: Early functional treatment of a fifth metatarsal fracture using an orthopaedic boot. Swiss Surg 3: 81, 1997.
-
15
Zwitser EW, Breederveld RS: Fractures of the fifth metatarsal; diagnosis and treatment. Injury 41: 555, 2010.
-
16
Lee TH, Lee JH, Chay SW, et al.: Comparison of clinical and radiologic outcomes between non-operative and operative treatment in 5th metatarsal base fractures (Zone 1). Injury 47: 1789, 2016.
-
17
Lapidus LJ, Rosfors S, Ponzer S, et al.: Prolonged thromboprophylaxis with dalteparin after surgical treatment of Achilles tendon rupture: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. J Orthop Trauma 21: 52, 2007.
Comparison of Self-adhesive Taping and Short-Leg Casting to Treat Tuberosity Fractures of the Proximal Fifth Metatarsal: A Prospective Study
Search for other papers by Sefa Batıbay in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Serkan Bayram in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sedat Duman in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Kayahan Karaytuğ in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Savas Camur in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background: The aim of this study is to compare clinical and radiologic outcomes of self-adhesive taping (SAT) or a short- leg cast (SLC) groups with base of fifth metatarsi.
Methods: Functional outcome was assessed by the Visual-Analogue-Scale Foot and Ankle (VAS-FA) at the Emergency and at 2, 4, 6, and 12 weeks. Labour loss, bone union and The American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Score (AOFAS) at 12 weeks were also assessed.
Results: There was no difference between the SAT group and SLC group in VAS-FA scores at time of injury, 6 and 12 weeks. The SAT group had a significantly higher mean VAS-FA score at the second and fourth weeks of follow-up compared with the SLC group (P = .001 and P = .039, respectively). No correlation was observed between the fracture gap and functional scores for both groups. There was no difference in AOFAS between two groups at 12 weeks. Twenty one patients were unable to work for a mean of 38.2 days during the treatment. 10 patients with the SAT missed 37.5 days and eleven patients with the SLC g missed 40.2 (p: 0.41). The bone union was also achieved for all patients within 12 weeks.
Conclusion: Treatment with SAT in these fractures had satisfactory functional results compared with traditional SLC. Although there were no significant differences in labor loss and use of assistive devices, The VAS-FA score was significantly higher in SAT group than the SLC group at the second and fourth weeks of treatment.
advertising
