Are enlarged peroneal tubercle and accessory anterolateral talar facet associated with calcaneal spur?

BACKGROUND: As the anatomical variations of the foot, enlarged peroneal tubercle (EPT) and accessory anterolateral talar facet (AALTF) have attracted the attention of foot surgeons in recent years. However, EPT and AALTF have not been examined for a relationship with calcaneus spur (CS) as a common osteophyte. METHODS: The subjects were 369 individuals who died in northeastern Thailand and were preserved as skeletal specimens. The authors examined for the presence of left and right EPT, AALTF, and calcaneus spur (CS). We divided the EPT (+) group with EPT and the EPT (-) group without it and also divided the AALTF (+) group with AALTF and the AALTF (-) group without it. The age at death and the presence of CS were compared statistically between the EPT (+) and EPT (-) groups and between the AATLF (+) and AALTF (-) groups. RESULTS: Out of the total 369 cases, EPT was found in 117 cases (31.7%), AALTF was positive in 91 cases (24.7%), and CS was found in 194 cases (52.3%). In comparison between EPT (+) and EPT (-) groups, CS was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) in the EPT (+) group, but there was no significant difference in age at death. In comparison between AALTF (+) and AALTF (-) groups, there was no significant difference in age at death or CS. CONCLUSION: This study showed a strong relationship between EPT and CS, and the prevalence of EPT and AALTF by age in Thailand was first reported. We believe it helps to know the pathogenesis and biomechanism of EPT and AALTF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Incidence and Skeletal Features of Developmental Cervical and Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PURPOSE: To report the prevalence and relationship of developmental cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis (DCSS and DLSS) with the bone parameters of the skull and extremities. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: DCSS and DLSS are found occasionally in daily practice. DCSS and DLSS can cause compressive myelopathy, radiculopathy, and cauda equina syndrome; however, data on their prevalence and correlation with skull and skeletal extremity profiles is scarce. METHODS: A cross-sectional measurement study of 293 whole-body dried-bone samples was conducted. We measured the anteroposterior (AP) and transverse diameter of the fourth to sixth cervical vertebrae (C4-C6) and third to fifth lumbar vertebrae (L3-L5). Stenosis of the cervical spine and lumbar spine was defined as an AP diameter of <12 mm and <13 mm, respectively. We also measured the skull circumference, the AP and transverse diameters of the foramen magnum, the inner and outer inter distances between the left and right orbital bones, the humerus length, and the femoral length. Kruskal-Wallis and post hoc analyses were used in the statistical analyses. RESULTS: The age was 22-93 years. DCSS was found in 59 (20.1%) and DLSS in 28 (9.6%). Twelve samples had both DCSS and DLSS (development spinal stenosis, DSS). When compared to the "no spinal stenosis sample," DSS (-), DCSS and DSS had a significantly smaller skull circumference, the transverse diameter of the foramen magnum, and inner and outer distance between the orbital bone (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in humeral length, femoral length, or AP diameter of the foramen magnum. CONCLUSIONS: DCSS was correlated with a small skull, a small transverse diameter of the foramen magnum, and a small orbital bone. A small skull was strongly associated with a small cervical canal. DLSS, on the other hand, was unrelated to either a small cervical canal or a small skull.