• 1

    D’Antoni AV: “Ankle and Foot,” in Gray’s Anatomy: The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice, 41st ed, edited by S Standring, Elsevier, New York, 2015.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Kelikian AS, Sarrafian SK: Sarrafian’s Anatomy of the Foot and Ankle: Descriptive, Topographic, Functional, 3rd edition, p 57, Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, New York, 2011.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Spradley MK, Jantz RL: Sex estimation in forensic anthropology: skull versus postcranial elements. J Forensic Sci 56: 289, 2011.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Fessler DM, Haley KJ, Lal RD: Sexual dimorphism in foot length proportionate to stature. Ann Hum Biol 32: 44, 2005.

  • 5

    DiMichele DL, Spradle MK: Sex estimation in a modern American osteological sample using a discriminant function analysis from the calcaneus. Forensic Sci Int 221: 152.e1, 2012.

    • Crossref
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Gualdi-Russo E: Sex determination from the talus and calcaneus measurements. Forensic Sci Int 171: 151, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Case DT, Ross AH: Sex determination from hand and foot bone lengths. J Forensic Sci 52: 264, 2007.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Tuller H, Durić’ M: Keeping the pieces together: comparison of mass grave excavation methodology. Forensic Sci Int 156: 192, 2006.

  • 9

    Harris SM, Case DT: Sexual dimorphism in the tarsal bones: implications for sex determination. J Forensic Sci 57: 295, 2012.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Kidd RS, Oxnard CE: Patterns of morphological discrimination in selected human tarsal elements. Am J Phys Anthropol 117: 169, 2002.

  • 11

    Aparisi Gómez M, Aparisi F, Bartoloni A, et al.: Anatomical variation in the ankle and foot: from incidental finding to inductor of pathology. Part II: midfoot and forefoot. Insights Imaging 10: 74, 2019.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Christman RA: Radiographic anatomy of the foot and ankle—part 2: the greater tarsus. JAPMA 104: 493, 2014.

  • 13

    Christman RA: Radiographic anatomy of the foot and ankle—part 3: the lesser tarsus. JAPMA 104: 633, 2014.

  • 14

    Christman RA: Radiographic anatomy of the foot and ankle—part4: the metatarsals. JAPMA 105: 51, 2015.

  • 15

    Christman RA: Radiographic anatomy of the foot and ankle—part 5. The phalanges. JAPMA 105: 141, 2015.

  • 16

    Roth S, Roth A, Jotanovic Z, et al.: Navicular index for differentiation of flatfoot from normal foot. IntOrthop 37: 1107, 2013.

  • 17

    Spörndly-Nees S, Dåsberg B, Nielsen RO, et al.: The navicular position test: a reliable measure of the navicular bone position during rest and loading. Int J Sports Phys Ther 6: 199, 2011.

    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Nguyen US, Dufour AB, Positano RG, et al.: The occurrence of ipsilateral or contralateral foot disorders and hand dominance: the Framingham foot study. JAPMA 103: 16, 2013.

  • 19

    Packheiser J, Schmitz J, Berretz G, et al.: Four meta-analyses across 164 studies on atypical footedness prevalence and its relation to handedness. Sci Rep 10: 14501, 2020.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Steele J, Mays S: Handedness and directional asymmetry in the long bones of the human upper limb. Int J Osteoarcheol 5: 39, 1995.

  • 21

    Plochocki JH. Bilateral variation in limb articular surface dimensions. Am J Hum Biol 16: 328, 2004.

  • 22

    Tesorieri M: Differential diagnosis of pathologically induced upper and lower limb asymmetry in a burial from late medieval Ireland (CE 1439–1511). Int J Paleopathol 14: 46, 2016.

    • Crossref
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Gülhand Ö: Tibia kemiğine ait metrik ölçümlerde bilateral asimetrinin değerlendirilmesi. Anthropology 39: 29, 2020.

  • 24

    Meghana N, Savithri P: Morphological analysis of length of human humerus. J Evol Med Dental Sci 9: 1940, 2020.

  • 25

    Sung K, Kwon SS, Park MS, et al.: Natural progression of radiographic indices in juvenile hallux valgus deformity. Foot Ankle Surg 25: 378, 2019.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Web of Science
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Morphometric Study of the Navicular Bone in a Nigerian Population: A Direct Measurement Study

View More View Less
  • 1 Alex Ekwueme Federal University, Ndufu-Alike Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Ndufu-Alike Ikwo, Ebonyi, Nigeria.
  • | 2 University of Nigeria, Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Enugu, Nigeria.
  • | 3 Enugu State University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, Enugu, Nigeria.
  • | 4 Ebonyi State University, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, Abakaliki, Ebonyi, Nigeria.
Restricted access

Background: The human foot, containing approximately 26 bones, is highly developed for movement, balance, and weightbearing. It is modified into medial longitudinal, lateral longitudinal, and transverse arches which, in addition to the above functions, play a role in protecting the plantar tissues and neurovascular structures. Morphometry of the navicular bone, one of the bones of the foot that plays an important role in the medial longitudinal arch, was investigated in this study.

Methods: One hundred fifty adult dry navicular bones were used. Navicular breadth, height, maximum thickness, maximum talar facet height and breadth, maximum cuneiform facet height and breadth, and maximum navicular tuberosity projection height were measured using digital Vernier callipers. The anatomical features were used to determine the side. Bones with features that suggested previous fractures or any previous disease were excluded from this study. Ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the Department of Anatomy, Ebonyi State University, Abakaliki, Nigeria.

Results: The navicular bone showed great variations in its left and right sides, with the values of the dimensions on the left being higher than the right.

Conclusions: An understanding of these variations will be helpful to medical scientists, osteologists, and orthopedic surgeons during surgical interventions on navicular bone fracture and accessory navicular syndrome.

Corresponding author: Emmanuel Anayochukwu Esom, PhD, Department of Anatomy, Faculty of Basic Medical Sciences, College of Medicine, University of Nigeria, Enugu Campus, Enugu 400001, Nigeria. (E-mail: emmanuel.esom@unn.edu.ng)