Zone II and III fifth metatarsal fractures in athletes

Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine (M Drakos, section editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Foot and Ankle Sports Medicine

Abstract

Purpose of review

This study aimed to review indications, complications, and outcomes of zone II and III fifth metatarsal fractures based on recent literature.

Recent findings

High rates of nonunion, delayed union, and refracture in athletes treated non-operatively. The standard of care is operative treatment in athletes with intramedullary fixation.

Summary

Operative treatment of zone II and III fractures in athletes will decrease the risk of nonunion and refracture while leading to an earlier return to play.

Keywords

Metatarsal fracture Jones fracture Athlete 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Robert Anderson reports consultant fees from Wright Medical, Arthrex, Amniox, DJO, and Zimmer Biomet, as well as royalties from Arthrex, Wright Medical, and Zimmer Biomet, outside of the submitted work.

Michael Le declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights and informed consent

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

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Jones RI. Fracture of the base of the fifth metatarsal bone by indirect violence. Ann Surg. 1902;35(6):697–700.2.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Petrisor BA, Ekrol I, Court-Brown C. The epidemiology of metatarsal fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27(3):172–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raikin SM, Slenker N, Ratigan B. The association of a varus hindfoot and fracture of the fifth metatarsal metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction: the Jones fracture. Am J Sports Med. 2008;36(7):1367–72. doi: 10.1177/0363546508314401.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lawrence SJ, Botte MJ. Jones’ fractures and related fractures of the proximal fifth metatarsal. Foot Ankle. 1993;14(6):358–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chuckpaiwong B, Queen RM, Easley ME, Nunley JA. Distinguishing Jones and Proximal diaphyseal fractures of the fifth metatarsal. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(8):1966–70. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0222-7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kavanaugh JH, Brower TD, Mann RV. The Jones fracture revisited. JBJS. 1978;60(6):776–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shereff MJ, Yang QM, Kummer FJ, Frey CC, Greenidge N. Vascular anatomy of the fifth metatarsal. Foot Ankle Int. 1991;11(6):350–3. doi: 10.1177/1071100791011000602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morris PM, Francois AG, Marcus RE, Farrow LD. The effect of peroneus brevis tendon anatomy on the stability of fractures at the fifth metatarsal base. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(5):579–84. doi: 10.1177/1071100714565177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cain LE, Nicholson LL, Adams RD, Burns J. Foot morphology and foot/ankle injury in indoor football. J Sci Med Sport. 2007t;10(5):311–9. Epub 2006 Sept 1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoho RM, Carrington S, Dix B, Vardaxis V. The association of metatarsus adductus to the proximal fifth metatarsal Jones fracture. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012;51(6):739–42. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2012.08.008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roche AJ, Calder JD. Treatment and return to sport following a Jones fracture of the fifth metatarsal: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(6):1307–15. doi: 10.1007/s00167-012-2138-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    • Hunt KJ, Anderson RB. Treatment of Jones fracture nonunions and refractures in elite athlete: outcomes of intramedullary screw fixation with bone grafting. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(9):1948–54. doi: 10.1177/0363546511408868. Recently published paper reviewing the outcome of elite athletes’ Jones fracture union and return to play following fracture fixation CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    • Scott RT, Hyer CF, DeMill SL. Screw fixation diameter for fifth metatarsal Jones fracture: a cadaveric study. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2015;54(2):227–9. doi: 10.1053/j.jfas.2014.11.010. Recent cadaveric study determining the minimal screw diameter for Jones fracture fixation CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    • Ochenjele G, Ho B, Switaj PJ, Fuchs D, Goyal N, Kadakia AR. Radiographic study of the fifth metatarsal for optimal intramedullary screw fixation of Jones fracture. Foot Ankle Int. 2015;36(3):293–301. doi: 10.1177/1071100714553467. Recent cadaveric study also determining the minimal screw diameter for Jones fracture fixation and estimating the screw length to prevent fracture displacement CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fansa AM, Smyth NA, Murawski CD, Kennedy JG. The lateral dorsal cutaneous branch of the sural nerve: clinical importance of the surgical approach to proximal fifth metatarsal fracture fixation. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(8):1895–8. doi: 10.1177/0363546512448320.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Horst F, Gilber BJ, Glisson RR, Nunly JA. Torque resistance after fixation of Jones fractures with intramedullary screws. Foot Ankle Int. 2004;25(12):914–9. doi: 10.1177/107110070402501212.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hunt KJ, Goeb Y, Esparza R, Malone M, Shultz R, Matheson G. Site-specific loading at the fifth metatarsal base in rehabilitative devices: implications for Jones fracture treatment. PM R. 2014;6(11):1022–9. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2014.05.011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bassett CA, Michell SN, Gaston SR. Pulsed electromagnetic field treatment in ununited fractures and failed arthrodesis. JAMA. 1982;247(5):623–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Holmes Jr GB. Treatment of delayed unions and nonunions of the proximal fifth metatarsal with pulsed electromagnetic fields. Foot Ankle Int. 1994;15(10):552–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    •• Streit A, Watson BC, Granata JD, Philbin TM, Lin HN, O’Connor JP, Lin S. Effect on clinical outcome and growth factor synthesis with adjunctive use of pulsed electromagnetic fields for fifth metatarsal nonunion fracture: a double-blind randomized study. Foot Ankle Int. 2016; doi: 10.1177/1071100716652621. Recent randomized controlled trial assessing the outcomes when using PEMF following Jones fractures and the effects of PEMF on growth factor production at the fracture site PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Constantini NW, Arieli R, Chodick G, Dubnov-Raz G. High prevalence of vitamin D insufficiency in athletes and dancers. Clin J Sport Med. 2010;20(5):368–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lovell G. Vitamin D status of females in an elite gymnastics program. Clin J Sport Med. 2008;18(2):159–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lappe J, Cullen D, Haynatzki G, Recker R, Ahlf R, Thompson K. Calcium and vitamin d supplementation decreases incidence of stress fractures in female navy recruits. J Bone Miner Res. 2008;23(5):741–9. doi: 10.1359/jbmr.080102.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smith TO, Clark A, Hing CB. Interventions for treating proximal fifth metatarsal fractures in adults: a meta-analysis of the current evidence-base. Foot Ankle Surg. 2011;17(4):300–7. doi: 10.1016/j.fas.2010.12.005.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    • Metzl J, Olson K, Davis WH, Jones C, Cohen B, Anderson R. A clinical and radiographic comparison of two hardware systems used to treat Jones fracture of the fifth metatarsal. Foot Ankle Int. 2013;34(7):956–61. doi: 10.1177/1071100713483100. Recently published study comparing fracture specific screws to tranditional screws. Both screws have similar union rates but more complications are seen with traditional screws. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nagao M, Saita Y, Kameda S, Seto H, Sadatsuki R, Takazawa Y, Yoshimura M, Aoba Y, Ikeda H, Kaneko K, Nozawa M, Kim SG. Headless compression screw fixation of jones fractures: an outcome study in Japanese athletes. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(11):2578–82. doi: 10.1177/0363546512459460.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Orr JD, Glisson RR, Nunley JA. Jones fracture fixation: a biomechanical comparison of partially threaded scews versus tapered variable pitch screws. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40(3):691–8. doi: 10.1177/0363546511428870.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sides SD, Fetter NL, Glisson R, Nunley JA. Bending stiffness and pull-out strength of tapered, variable pitch screws, and 6.5-mm cancellous screws in acute Jones fractures. Foot Ankle Int. 2006;27(10):821–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Huh J, Glisson RR, Matsumoto T, Easley ME. Biomechanical comparison of intramedullary screw versus low-profile plate fixation of a Jones fracture. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37(4):411–8. doi: 10.1177/1071100715619678.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bigsby E, Halliday R, Middleton RG, Case R, Harries W. Functional outcome of fifth metatarsal fractures. Injury. 2014;45(12):2009–12. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2014.06.010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Begly JP, Guss M, Ramme AJ, Karia R, Meislin RJ. Return to play and performance after jones fracture in the National Basketball Association Athletes. Spots Health. 2016 Jul;8(4):342–6. doi: 10.1177/1941738115621011.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    • Lareau CR, Hsu AR, Anderson RB. Return to play in National Football League Players after Operative Jones Fracture Treatment. Foot Ankle Int. 2016;37(1):8–16. doi: 10.1177/1071100715603983. Most recent paper reviewing the outcomes of Jones fracture in NFL players and the amount of time required for return to play CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OrthopaedicsCarolinas Medical CenterCharlotteUSA
  2. 2.OrthoCarolina Foot & Ankle InstituteCharlotteUSA

Personalised recommendations