An eighteen-year-old football player presented with an insidious onset of localised lateral foot pain. He had recently started playing with his club’s first team and had increased his training volume. He was found to have localised tenderness over the lateral mid-foot and pain with resisted ankle eversion
X-ray images showed bilateral os peronei. On the symptomatic side the os appears irregular, sclerotic and fragmented. On the asymptomatic side the os is round and well corticated. No other abnormality is seen.
This player was diagnosed with painful os peroneum syndrome (known as POPS). He was managed with a short period of rest, a lateral posted orthotic and a change in footwear. He was able to continue to train in a limited capacity and returned to normal team training after four weeks. Given that the player recovered relatively quickly no further imaging was done in this case. If the pain had been more significant, or had persisted for a longer period of time, further imaging might have been useful. An MRI scan would be expected to show a diffuse increase in signal within the ossicle and changes within the peroneum longus tendon (consistent with tendinopathy). MRI would also help rule out other potential causes of his symptoms.
An os peroneum is an accessory ossicle located within the peroneus longus tendon. They are a common incidental finding. They are unilateral in 40% of cases and can be bipartate. The term POPS describes a wide spectrum of conditions, including fractures or diastases, and may cause tenosynovitis or even rupture of the peroneal tendon. Two main forms of POPS have been described in the literature, acute and chronic. The acute form occurs as a result of trauma and is commonly associated with an ankle inversion injury. This can cause a fracture or diastasis of the os peroneum. This case is more typical of the ‘chronic’ form. In most cases conservative treatment is effective. Surgical excision is an option when the symptoms are more refractory.
FIFA does not bear any responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of any information provided in the “Radiology Review” features and cannot be held liable with regard to the information provided or any acts or omissions occurring on the basis of this information.