Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Musculoskeletal sonography of the normal foot

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Traumatic, degenerative and rheumatological injuries of the foot are common and can be managed by an ever increasing number of treatments and surgical interventions. High-frequency sonography is inexpensive, portable and is unique in allowing true dynamic assessment of the ligamentous, muscular and tendinous structures. The ultrasound technique demonstrates a steep learning curve and requires detailed knowledge of the foot anatomy. Ultrasound assessment plays an important role in the diagnosis and management of injuries of these structures by guiding rehabilitation and surgical intervention without delay. However, intimate knowledge of the ultrasound appearances of the foot anatomy and normal variants is paramount to correctly identify pathological conditions. We describe the normal sonographic appearances of the foot musculoskeletal structures with MR correlation including joints and their ligaments, dorsal and plantar surfaces of the foot, and the arches of the foot and their supporting structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

Reference

  1. Erickson SJ. Sonography of the foot and ankle. Foot Ankle Clin. 2000; 5(1): 29–48.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rosenthal SJ, Jones PH, Wetzel LH. Phase inversion tissue harmonic sonographic imaging: a clinical utility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001; 176(6): 1393–1398.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Martinolli C, Derchi LE, Pastorino C, Bertolotto M, Silvestri E. Analysis of echotexture of tendons with US. Radiology. 1993; 186: 839–843.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rawool NM, Nazarian LN. Ultrasound of the ankle and foot. Semin Ultrasound CT MRI. 2000; 21(3): 275–284.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Patel S, Fessell DP, Jacobson JA, Hayes CW, Van Holsbeeck MT. Artifacts, anatomic variants and pitfalls in sonography of the foot and ankle. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2002; 178: 1247–1254.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Mengiardi B, Zanetti M, Schöttle PB, et al. Spring ligament complex: MR imaging–anatomic correlation and findings in asymptomatic subjects. Radiology. 2005; 237: 242–249.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Toye LR, Helms CA, Hoffman BD, Easley M, Nunley JA. MRI of spring ligament tears. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005; 184: 1475–1480.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Harish S, Jan E, Finlay K, et al. Sonography of the superomedial part of the spring ligament complex of the foot: a study of cadavers and asymptomatic volunteers. Skeletal Radiol. 2006; 36(3): 221–228.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cheung Y, Rosenberg ZS. MR imaging of ligamentous abnormalities of the ankle and foot. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2001; 9: 507–531.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Harish S, Kumbhare D, O’Neill J, Popowich T. Comparison of sonography and magnetic resonance imaging for spring ligament abnormalities preliminary study. J Ultrasound Med. 2008; 27(8): 1145–1152.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hunt SA, Ropiak C, Tejwani NC. Lisfranc joint injuries: diagnosis and treatment. Am J Orthop. 2006; 35(8): 376–385.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sherief TI, Mucci B, Greiss M. Lisfranc injury: how frequently does it get missed? And how can we improve? Injury. 2007; 38(7): 856–860.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Cardinal E, Chhem RK, Beuregard CG, Aubin B, Pelletier M. Plantar fasciitis: sonographic evaluation. Radiology. 1996; 201: 257–259.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Karabay N, Toros T, Hurel C. Ultrasonographic evaluation in plantar fasciitis. J Foot Ankle Surg. 2007; 46(6): 442–446.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gibbon WW, Long G. Ultrasound of the plantar aponeurosis (fascia). Skeletal Radiol. 1999; 28(1): 21–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sabir N, Demirlenk S, Yagci B, Karabulut N, Cubukcu S. Clinical utility of sonography in diagnosing plantar fasciitis. J Ultrasound Med. 2005; 24(8): 1041–1048.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zanetti M, Strehle JK, Zollinger H, Hodler J. Morton neuroma and fluid in the intermetatarsal bursae on MR images of 70 asymptomatic volunteers. Radiology. 1997; 203: 516–520.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee MJ, Kim S, Huh YM, et al. Morton neuroma: evaluated with ultrasonography and MR imaging. Korean J Radiol. 2007; 8(2): 148–155.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Williams A, Davies MS. Foot and ankle. In: Standring S, editor. Gray’s anatomy: the anatomical basis of medicine and surgery. 39th ed. London: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Taniguchi A, Tanaka Y, Takakura Y, Kadono K, Maeda M, Yamamoto H. Anatomy of the spring ligament. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003; 85A(11): 2174–2178.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hintermann B, Valderrabano V, Kundert HP. Lengthening of the lateral column and reconstruction of the medial soft tissue for treatment of acquired flatfoot deformity associated with insufficiency of the posterior tibial tendon. Foot Ankle Int. 1999; 20: 622–629.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Miller SD, Van Holsbeeck M, Boruta PM, Wu KK, Katcherian DA. Ultrasound in the diagnosis of posterior tibial tendon pathology. Foot Ankle Int. 1996; 17(9): 555–558.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nazarian LN, Rawool NM, Martin CE, Schweitzer ME. Synovial fluid in the hindfoot and ankle: detection of amount and distribution with US. Radiology. 1995; 197: 275–278.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Fessell DP, van Holsbeeck MT. Foot and ankle sonography. Radiol Clin North Am. 1999; 37(4): 831–858.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Nallamshetty L, Nazarian LN, Schweitzer ME, et al. Evaluation of posterior tibial pathology: comparison of sonography and MR imaging. Skeletal Radiol. 2005; 34(7): 375–380.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gerling MC, Pfirrmann CWA, Farooki S, et al. Posterior tibialis tendon tears: comparison of the diagnostic efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging and ultrasonography for the detection of surgically created longitudinal tears in cadavers. Investig Radiol. 2003; 38(1): 51–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Cheung YY, Rosenberg ZS, Ramsinghani R, Beltran J, Jahss MH. Peroneus quartus muscle: MR imaging features. Radiology. 1997; 202: 745–750.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Grant TH, Kelikian AS, Jereb SE, McCarthy RJ. Ultrasound diagnosis of peroneal tendon tears a surgical correlation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87(8): 1788–1794.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Neustadter J, Raikin SM, Nazarian LN. Dynamic sonographic evaluation of peroneal tendon subluxation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 985–988.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiology Department, Chelsea & Westminster Hospital, 369 Fulham Road, London, SW10 9NH, UK

    G. Ansede, J. C. Lee & J. C. Healy

Authors
  1. G. Ansede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. C. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. C. Healy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Ansede.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ansede, G., Lee, J.C. & Healy, J.C. Musculoskeletal sonography of the normal foot. Skeletal Radiol 39, 225–242 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0697-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-009-0697-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation