대한정형외과학회지 (Journal of the Korean Orthopaedic Association)

  • 제55권4호
  • /
  • Pages.324-330
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 1226-2102(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2005-8918(eISSN)
대한정형외과학회 (Korean Orthopaedic Association)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

한국인의 족근골 유합의 유병률: 병원 내원 환자에 대한 연구

Prevalence of Tarsal Coalition in the Korean Population: A Single Institution-Based Study

  • Kim, Tae Yong (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Police Hospital) ;
  • Yoon, So Hee (Department of Radiology, National Police Hospital) ;
  • Ko, Jung Hoon (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Police Hospital) ;
  • Lee, Tae Ho (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Police Hospital) ;
  • Yi, Seung Rim (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Police Hospital)
  • 투고 : 2019.07.11
  • 심사 : 2019.10.04
  • 발행 : 2020.08.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목적: 족근골 유합의 유병률에 대한 국내의 연구가 드물고 특히 성인에서의 다발성 족근골 유합은 국내뿐만 아니라 외국에서도 유병률에 대한 연구가 부족하기 때문에 본원에 내원한 환자를 대상으로 시행한 영상 검사를 이용하여 한국인의 족근골 유합의 양상 및 유병률에 대해 알아보고자 한다. 대상 및 방법: 2009년 3월부터 2019년 2월까지 본원에서 시행한 족부 및 족관절의 컴퓨터 단층촬영 검사 및 자기공명영상 검사를 시행한 족관절 염좌 및 골절 환자 총 4,711명(남성 4,454명, 여성 257명)을 대상으로 족근골 유합의 유병률 및 양상에 대하여 후향적으로 조사하였다. 결과: 10년동안 총 78명(1.7%)의 환자에서 족근골 유합이 관찰되었고 전체 족근골 유합 환자 중 25명(32.1%)에서 다발성 족근골 유합이 확인되었다. 해부학적 위치에 따라 거골-종골 유합이 단발성(31명 37예, 62.7%) 및 다발성(22명 23예, 45.1%) 족근골 유합 모두에서 가장 흔하게 관찰되었고 단발성 유합에서는 종골-주상골 유합(10명, 16.9%), 주상골-설상골 유합(9명, 15.3%), 입방골-주상골 유합(3명, 5.1%)의 순서로, 다발성 유합에서는 종골-주상골 유합(14명 14예, 27.5%), 거골-주상골 유합(6명 6예, 11.8%)의 빈도 순으로 관찰되었다. 또한 총 60예의 거골-종골 유합 중 후방 관절소면에서 24예(40.0%)의 유합이 확인되었고 중간 관절소면에서 18예(30.0%), 전방 관절소면에서 4예(6.7%)가 관찰되었다. 그리고 조직학적인 분류에 따라 연골성 유합이 단발성(32명 35예, 59.3%) 및 다발성(20명 37예, 72.5%) 4예(6.7%)모두에서 가장 많이 관찰되었다. 결론: 기존의 문헌들을 통해서 알려진 바와 같이 본 연구에서는 거골-종골 유합이 가장 흔하게 나타나는 것으로 확인하였다. 하지만 거골-종골 유합은 대부분 중간 관절소면에서 주로 나타난다고 알려져 있는 것과는 달리 본 연구에서는 후방 관절소면에서 더욱 많이 관찰되었다. 그리고 극히 드물게 관찰되는 것으로 알려진 다발성 족근골 유합은 이제까지 알려진 바와 달리 다양한 양상으로 드물지 않게 발견되는 것을 확인하였다.

Purpose: Korean studies on the prevalence of a tarsal coalition are quite rare, and there are very few reports on the prevalence of multiple tarsal coalitions among adults in the foreign literature. Therefore, this study examined the characteristics and prevalence of tarsal coalition in the Korean population based on imaging tests. Materials and Methods: The prevalence of tarsal coalition and its anatomical location and histological classification were reviewed retrospectively among 4,711 patients (4,454 males and 257 females) with an ankle sprain or ankle fracture who underwent foot and ankle computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging between March 2009 and February 2019 at the authors' institution. Results: Over a period of 10 years, 78 patients (1.7%) had a tarsal coalition, among whom 53 patients (67.9%) had an isolated tarsal coalition and 25 patients (32.1%) had multiple tarsal coalitions. Regarding the anatomical location, a talocalcaneal coalition was the most common type in both isolated (31 patients, 37 cases [62.7%]) and multiple (22 patients, 23 cases [45.1%]) tarsal coalitions. In the isolated coalition group, the second-most common type was calcaneonavicular coalition (10 patients, 16.9%), followed by naviculocuneiform (nine patients, 15.3%) and cuboidonavicular coalitions (three patients, 5.1%). In the multiple coalition group, the second-most common coalition type was calcaneonavicular coalition (14 patients, 14 cases [27.5%]), followed by talonavicular coalition (six patients, six cases [11.8%]). From a total of 60 cases of talocalcaneal coalition, 24 cases (40.0%) were in the posterior facet, 18 cases (30.0%) in the middle facet, and four cases (6.7%) in the anterior facet. Regarding the histological classification, cartilaginous coalition was the most common in both single (32 patients, 35 cases [59.3%]) and multiple (20 patients, 37 cases [72.5%]) coalition groups. Conclusion: The present study found that talocalcaneal coalition was the most common type of tarsal coalition. In contrast to previous reports that a talocalcaneal coalition generally occurs in the middle facet, it was usually observed in the posterior facet in the present study. In addition, although multiple tarsal coalitions have been reported to be quite rare, this study confirmed that they are not rare and can occur in a range of patterns.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Leonard MA. The inheritance of tarsal coalition and its relationship to spastic flat foot. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1974;56:520-6. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.56B3.520
  2. Wray J, Herndon CN. Hereditary transmission of congenital coalition of the calcaneus to the navicular. J Bone Joint Surg. 1963;45:365-72. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-196345020-00016
  3. Harris RI, Beath T. Etiology of peroneal spastic flat foot. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1948;30:624-34. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.30B4.624
  4. Stormont DM, Peterson HA. The relative incidence of tarsal coalition. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983;181:28-36.
  5. Solomon LB, Ruhli FJ, Taylor J, Ferris L, Pope R, Henneberg M. A dissection and computer tomograph study of tarsal coalitions in 100 cadaver feet. J Orthop Res. 2003;21:352-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0736-0266(02)00131-6
  6. Nalaboff KM, Schweitzer ME. MRI of tarsal coalition: frequency, distribution, and innovative signs. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2008;66:14-21.
  7. Swiontkowski MF, Scranton PE, Hansen S. Tarsal coalitions: long-term results of surgical treatment. J Pediatr Orthop. 1983;3:287-92. https://doi.org/10.1097/01241398-198307000-00003
  8. Harris RI. Retrospect: personeal spastic flat foot (rigid valgus foot). J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1965;47:1657-67. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-196547080-00020
  9. Kumai T, Tanaka Y, Takakura Y, Tamai S. Isolated first naviculocuneiform joint coalition. Foot Ankle Int. 1996;17:635-40. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110079601701009
  10. Scranton PE Jr. Treatment of symptomatic talocalcaneal coalition. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69:533-9. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-198769040-00009
  11. Clarke DM. Multiple tarsal coalitions in the same foot. J Pediatr Orthop. 1997;17:777-80. https://doi.org/10.1097/01241398-199711000-00015
  12. Linklater J, Hayter CL, Vu D, Tse K. Anatomy of the subtalar joint and imaging of talo-calcaneal coalition. Skeletal Radiol. 2009;38:437-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-008-0615-4
  13. Crim JR, Kjeldsberg KM. Radiographic diagnosis of tarsal coalition. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004;182:323-8. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.182.2.1820323
  14. Mosier KM, Asher M. Tarsal coalitions and peroneal spastic flat foot. a review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66:976-84. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-198466070-00002
  15. Lim S, Lee HK, Bae S, Rim NJ, Cho J. A radiological classification system for talocalcaneal coalition based on a multi-planar imaging study using CT and MRI. Insights Imaging. 2013;4:563-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-013-0267-3
  16. Kumar SJ, Guille JT, Lee MS, Couto JC. Osseous and non-osseous coalition of the middle facet of the talocalcaneal joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74:529-35. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199274040-00008
  17. Lemley F, Berlet G, Hill K, Philbin T, Isaac B, Lee T. Current concepts review: Tarsal coalition. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27:1163-9. https://doi.org/10.1177/107110070602701229
  18. Wechsler RJ, Schweitzer ME, Deely DM, Horn BD, Pizzutillo PD. Tarsal coalition: depiction and characterization with CT and MR imaging. Radiology. 1994;193:447-52. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.193.2.7972761
  19. Newman JS, Newberg AH. Congenital tarsal coalition: multimodality evaluation with emphasis on CT and MR imaging. Radiogr. 2000;20:321-32; quiz 526-7, 532. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiographics.20.2.g00mc03321
  20. Emery KH, Bisset GS 3rd, Johnson ND, Nunan PJ. Tarsal coalition: a blinded comparison of MRI and CT. Pediatr Radiol. 1998;28:612-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002470050430
  21. Downey MS. Tarsal coalitions. A surgical classification. J Am Podiatr Med Assoc. 1991;81:187-97. https://doi.org/10.7547/87507315-81-4-187
  22. Kim JH, Gwak HC, Lee CR, et al. Incidence of Tarsal coalition: an institutional magnetic resonance imaging analysis. J Korean Foot Ankle Soc. 2016;20:116-20. https://doi.org/10.14193/jkfas.2016.20.3.116
  23. Vincent KA. Tarsal coalition and painful flatfoot. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1998;6:274-81. https://doi.org/10.5435/00124635-199809000-00002
  24. Yun SJ, Jin W, Kim GY, et al. A different type of talocalcaneal coalition with os sustentaculum: the continued necessity of revision of classification. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205:W612-8. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.14.14082
  25. Lee SH, Park HJ, Yeo ED, Lee YK. Talocalcaneal coalition: a focus on radiographic findings and sites of bridging. Indian J Orthop. 2016;50:661-8. https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5413.193473
  26. Taniguchi A, Tanaka Y, Kadono K, Takakura Y, Kurumatani N. C sign for diagnosis of talocalcaneal coalition. Radiology. 2003;228:501-5. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2282020445
  27. Blakemore LC, Cooperman DR, Thompson GH. The rigid flatfoot. Tarsal coalitions. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2000;17:531-55.
  28. Olney BW, Asher MA. Excision of symptomatic coalition of the middle facet of the talocalcaneal joint. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987;69:539-44. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-198769040-00010