Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2023.
World J Orthop. Jun 18, 2023; 14(6): 471-484
Published online Jun 18, 2023. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v14.i6.471
Table 1 Inclusion and exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Acute toe phalanx fracturesToe sesamoid fractures
Stress toe phalanx fracturesToe joint dislocation without fracture
Elite or recreational athletesToe joint fracture dislocation
Return rate to sporting activity reportedToe ligament injuries
Time to return to sporting activity reportedNo sporting outcome data reported
Two or more injuries reportedConcomitant upper or lower limb fractures
Peer-reviewed journalsReviews, case reports, abstracts, or anecdotal articles
English language Animal, cadaver, or in vitro studies
Table 2 Demographic data - acute fractures
Ref.
n
Study type
Mean age (yr)
Male:Female
Follow-up, %
Sport
Level of sport
Most common MOI
Location
Modified coleman score
MINORS score
General cohort
Robertson et al[15], 20128Case series21.18:06 (75)SoccerGeneral populationTackle (50%)Great toe (n = 6) 2nd Toe (n = 1); 3rd Toe (n = 1)4412
Larsson et al[16], 201618Case seriesN/A18:018 (100)SoccerElite/ProfessionalN/AN/A3912
Chan et al[17], 202153Case seriesN/A32:2153 (100)US Collegiate SportsCollegiateN/AN/A5412
Diaz et al[18], 202269RCSN/A69:069 (100)SoccerEliteN/AN/A4118
Intra-Articular (Physeal) base of proximal phalanx fractures
Maffulli[19], 20012Case series12.52:02 (100)Soccer (n = 1), Judo (n = 1)RecreationalTackleGreat toe proximal phalanx659
Perugia et al[20], 20144Case series13-15N/A4 (100)Gymnastics (n = 4)Adolescent high levelDismountGreat toe proximal phalanx6711
Bariteau et al[21], 20152Case series12.50:22 (100)Gymnastics (n = 2)EliteDismountGreat toe proximal phalanx6211
Table 3 Demographic data - stress fractures
Ref.
n
Study type
Mean age (yr)
Male:Female
Follow-up, %
Sport
Level of sport
Location
Associated deformity
Modified coleman score
MINORS score
Yokoe et al[22], 19863Case series16.3 (12-21)1:23 (100)Sprinting (n = 1), Rugby (n = 1), Kendo (n = 1)AmateurGreat Toe Proximal PhalanxHallux valgus (n = 3)348
Shiraishi et al[23], 19933Case series13.7 (12-17)1:23 (100)Volleyball (n = 1), Long Distance Running (n = 1), Soccer (n = 1)AmateurGreat toe proximal phalanx519
Yokoe et al[8], 200410Case series16.3 (12-21)2:810 (100)Sprinting (n = 6), Distance Running (n = 1), Basketball (n = 1), Rugby (n = 1), Kendo (n = 1)N/AGreat toe proximal phalanxHallux valgus (n = 9)358
Pitsis et al[24], 20042Case series29 (17-41)0:22 (100)Triathlon (n = 1), Gymnastics (n = 1)Non-professional/EliteGreat toe proximal phalanxHallux valgus (n = 1)468
Munemoto et al[25], 20094Case series14.5 (13-17)2:24 (100)Short track running (n = 3), Soccer (n = 1)AmateurGreat toe proximal phalanxHallux valgus (n = 3)558
Yamaguchi et al[26], 20174Case series14.8 (13-16)4:04 (100)Soccer (n = 3), Baseball (n = 1)N/A2nd toe proximal phalanxClaw toe (n = 1)528
Table 4 Outcome data - acute fractures
Ref.
n
Treatment (%)
Return to sport (%)
Return to the same level of sport (%)
Return time to sport
Secondary surgery - return rate (RR)/Return time (RT)
Persisting symptoms (%)
Complications
General cohort
Robertson et al[15], 20126PCM (100)3 (50)3 (50)7.0 wk (mean)3 (50)Nil
Larsson et al[16], 201618N/AN/AN/A26 d (mean)N/A1 re-fracture
Chan et al[17], 202153PCM (100)53 (100)N/A8.5 d (median)N/A1 re-fracture
Diaz et al[18], 202269N/AN/A30 d (median) N/ANil
Intra-articular (Physeal) base of proximal phalanx fractures
Maffulli[19], 20012PCM (50) PSM (50)2 (100)2 (100)By 6 mo0 (0)0 (0)
Perugia et al[20], 20144PSM (100)4 (100)4 (100)By 3 mo0 (0)0 (0)
Bariteau et al[21], 20152PCM (50) PSM (50)1 (50) (PSM) 1 (50) (PSM)5 mo1 – RR 100%/RT 14 wk0 (0)1 re-fracture (PCM)
Table 5 Outcome data - stress fractures
Ref.
n
Treatment (%)
Return to sport (%)
Return to the same level of sport (%)
Time to return to sport (mean)
Secondary surgery - return rate (RR)/Return time (RT)
Factors associated with secondary surgery
Persisting symptom (%)
Complications (%)
Yokoe et al[22], 19863PCM (67) PSM (33)3 (100)N/APCM - 3 mo; PSM - N/A0 (0)0 (0)
Shiraishi et al[23], 19933PCM (100)3 (100)3 (100)6 wk1 (33)1 non-union for a patient who did not stop training (33)
Yokoe et al[8], 200410PCM (100) 6 (60)6 (60)N/A4 (40) – RR 100% Hallux valgus deformity (n = 3)0 (0)3 delayed unions with PCM (50)
Pitsis et al[24], 20042PCM (100)0 (0)a0 (0)aN/A1 (50) – RR 100%2-yr delay to diagnosis 0 (0)1 non-union with PCM (50)
Munemoto et al[25], 20094PCM (50) PSM (50)4 (100)4 (100)PCM - 8.5 wk, PSM - 10 wk0 (0)1 mild deformity with PCM (50)
Yamaguchi et al[26], 20174PCM (100)3 (75)3 (75)5 wk1 (25) – RR 100%/RT 4 mo1-yr delay to diagnosis/Claw toe deformity0 (0)1 non-union and claw toe deformity with PCM (25)