Advertisement

MRI in patients with Haglund’s deformity and its influence on therapy

  • Florian DebusEmail author
  • Hans-Joachim Eberhard
  • Manuel Olivieri
  • Christian Dominik Peterlein
Orthopaedic Surgery
  • 36 Downloads

Abstract

Introduction

Heel pain is one of the common reasons why patients consult orthopaedic surgeons in an outpatient setting. The dorsal heel pain is often caused by a Haglund’s deformity which is an exostosis of the posterior superior calcaneus. It often leads to Haglund’s syndrome with calcaneal bursitis and Achilles tendinosis. This study aims to investigate the roll of MRI in diagnosis of Haglund’s syndrome and its influence on therapy.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively analysed data of 45 patients which clinically and radiologically confirmed Haglund’s deformity. Patients were divided into two groups that either did not receive MRI (MRI_0) or received MRI (MRI_1). To evaluate the significance, Fisher´s test was used. A statistical significance was assumed at p < 0.05.

Results

The average age was 57.0 years. There was no significant difference in therapy comparing the groups MRI_0 and MRI_1. Haglund’s syndrome was detected in 86.7% of all patients with Haglund’s deformity.

Conclusion

MRI does not influence the therapy of patients with Haglund’s deformity. Therefore, the resources of this cost-intensive and limited type of investigation should be used elsewhere. In cases of atypical heel pain, the MRI might be useful.

Keywords

Haglund’s deformity Haglund’s syndrome Heel pain MRI 

Notes

Funding

There is no funding source.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Irving DB, Cook JL, Menz HB (2006) Factors associated with chronic plantar heel pain: a systematic review. J Sci Med Sport 9(1–2):11–22 (discussion 23–4) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tu P, Heel pain: diagnosis and management. Am Fam Phys 97(2):86–93Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vaishya R et al (2016) Haglund’s syndrome: a commonly seen mysterious condition. Cureus 8(10):e820Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Thomas JL et al (2016) The diagnosis and treatment of heel pain: a clinical practice guideline-revision 2010. J Foot Ankle Surg. 49(3 Suppl):S1–S19Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chimutengwende-Gordon M, O’Donnell P, Singh D (2010) A comparative analysis of analgesic efficacy of ultrasound and Magnetic resonance imaging in plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Int. 31(10):865–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Krukowska J et al. (2016) A comparative analysis of analgesic efficacy of ultrasound and shock wave therapy in the treatment of patients with inflammation of the attachment of the plantar fascia in the course of calcaneal spurs. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 136(9):1289–1296CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    McNally EG, Shetty S (2010) Plantar fascia: imaging diagnosis and guided treatment. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol. 14(3):334–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tu P, Bytomski JR. Diagnosis of heel pain. Am Fam Phys 84(8):909–916Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Adigo AM et al., Haglund deformity: report of three cases. Pan Afr Med J. 22: p. 37Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jimenez Martin F et al. Haglund’s syndrome. Two case reports. Reumatol Clin. 13(1):37–38Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kang S, Thordarson DB, Charlton TP (2012) Insertional achilles tendinitis and Haglund’s deformity. Foot Ankle Int. 33(6):487–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bulstra GH, van Rheenen TA, Scholtes VA (2015) Can we measure the heel bump? Radiographic evaluation of Haglund’s deformity. J Foot Ankle Surg. 54(3):338–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Beek EJR et al. Value of MRI in medicine: More than just another test? J Magn Reson ImagingGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fazal MA, Tsekes D, Baloch I (1997) Is there a role for MRI in plantar heel pain. Foot Ankle Spec. 11(3):242–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Feydy A et al. (2012) Comparative study of MRI and power Doppler ultrasonography of the heel in patients with spondyloarthritis with and without heel pain and in controls. Ann Rheum Dis 71(4):498–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Leitze Z, Sella EJ, Aversa JM (2003) Endoscopic decompression of the retrocalcaneal space. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(8):1488–1496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lohrer H, David S, Nauck T (2016) Surgical treatment for achilles tendinopathy—a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17:207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lohrer H, Nauck T (2014) Results of operative treatment for recalcitrant retrocalcaneal bursitis and midportion Achilles tendinopathy in athletes. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 134(8):1073–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Gemeinschaftspraxis DREOPforzheimGermany
  2. 2.Zentrum für Orthopädie und UnfallchirurgieUniversitätsklinikum MarburgMarburgGermany

Personalised recommendations