MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411978597 · doi:10.3390/medicina61071215

Conservative Treatment of Sesamoiditis: A Systematic Literature Review with Individual-Level Pooled Data Analysis

2025· review· en· W4411978597 on OpenAlexaff
Carlo Biz, Maria Chiara Maccarone, Valentina Bonso, Elisa Belluzzi, Stefano Masiero, Nicola Luigi Bragazzi, Pietro Ruggieri

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicina · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicFoot and Ankle Surgery
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePhysical therapyAnkleVisual analogue scaleMEDLINECritical appraisalSystematic reviewProtocol (science)Meta-analysisEvidence-based medicineData extractionPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryAlternative medicineInternal medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Objectives: Sesamoiditis is a painful and functionally limiting condition that affects the sesamoid bones of the hallux, frequently seen in athletic populations. Despite its clinical relevance, there are no standardised guidelines for its conservative management. This systematic review aims to evaluate the effectiveness of conservative treatments for sesamoiditis by summarising individual-level data from published studies. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, ISI/Web of Science, and PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) up to December 2024 in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines and following a protocol specifically devised for rare or underrepresented medical conditions. Eligible studies included case reports and case series involving patients aged ≥16 years who were conservatively treated for clinically and/or radiologically diagnosed sesamoiditis. Data on patient demographics, diagnosis, type and duration of treatment, pain- (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS)) and function-related (Foot and Ankle Ability Measure (FAAM) and Foot and Ankle Outcome Score (FAOS)) outcomes, and return to activity were extracted. Study quality was assessed using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal tools. Pooled effect sizes were computed where applicable. Results: Out of 2380 initial records, 11 studies comprising 59 patients (29 females) were included. Treatments varied widely, including orthotics, corticosteroid injections, physical therapy, and biologic approaches such as concentrated bone marrow aspirate (CBMA). VAS scores improved in 66% of cases. NRS scores returned to baseline in some patients after initial improvement, revealing recurrence. FAAM and FAOS subscales showed functional improvements, particularly in sports-specific domains. Return to activity varied: in a case series, 45.4% resumed pain-free sports participation, while others remained symptomatic. Conclusions: Conservative treatment options for sesamoiditis showed variable effectiveness with promising outcomes in selected patients. Corticosteroid injections and orthotics appeared beneficial, but high recurrence and limited functional recovery persisted in some cases. Standardised treatment protocols and high-quality prospective studies are needed to improve clinical decision-making and optimise non-surgical management.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.083
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.172

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.083
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0260.035
Bibliometrics0.0250.017
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.146
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicinaSame topicFoot and Ankle SurgeryFrench-language works237,207