Original Research| Volume 52, ISSUE 6, P714-716, November 2013

Computed Tomography Review of Tarsal Canal Anatomy with Reference to the Fitting of Sinus Tarsi Implants in the Tarsal Canal


      Sinus tarsi implants are used in the treatment of symptomatic hyperpronating flexible flatfeet in children. Although some implants are inserted only into the sinus tarsi, others occupy both the sinus tarsi and the tarsal canal. The stem that is anchored in the tarsal canal depends on interference fit for the initial resistance to slippage. The first part of this computed tomography anatomic study in children was aimed at finding and measuring the dimensions in the narrowest point in the canal that provided the interference fit. The second part of the study assessed the possibility of the implant being loaded with axial body weight in the tarsal canal. All foot computed tomography scans performed consecutively at Birmingham Children's Hospital from January 2008 to December 2011 were reviewed to assess the tarsal canal dimensions on the sagittal views. A total of 52 scans fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The average age was 12.7 years. The narrowest mean anteroposterior diameter of the canal was 7.3 ± 1.12 (range 5.2 to 10.0) mm. The narrowest mean superoinferior diameter was 9.2 ± 1.32 (range 6.3 to 12.7) mm. A total of 50 patients had the narrowest dimension in the anteroposterior plane. A positive linear correlation was found between the anteroposterior diameter and the superoinferior distance (r = 0.51, p < .01). We have concluded that the stem of an arthroereisis implant extending into the tarsal canal is unlikely to be constantly bearing body weight, because it obtains an interference grip in the anteroposterior direction in almost all patients and not in the superoinferior line of axial body weight.

      Level of Clinical Evidence


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to The Journal of Foot and Ankle Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Metcalfe S.
        • Bowling F.
        • Reeves N.
        Subtalar joint arthroereisis in the management of pediatric flexible flatfoot: a critical review of the literature.
        Foot Ankle Int. 2011; 32: 1127-1139
        • Ayoob A.
        • De Maeseneer M.
        • Shahabpour M.
        • Van Roy P.
        • Barbaix E.
        • Qing S.
        The talocalcaneal unit: pictorial review of anatomy and pathological conditions on multidetector CT.
        J Bel Radiol. 2010; 93: 20-27
        • Saxena A.
        • Nguyen A.
        Preliminary radiographic findings and sizing implications on patients undergoing bioabsorbable subtalar arthroereisis.
        J Foot Ankle Surg. 2007; 46: 175-180
        • Graham M.E.
        • Jawrani N.T.
        • Chikka A.
        Extraosseous talotarsal stabilization using HyProCure® in adults: a 5-year retrospective follow-up.
        J Foot Ankle Surg. 2012; 51: 23-29
      1. NICE guidelines IPG305 Sinus tarsi implant insertion for mobile flatfoot. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence guidelines, midcity place, London, UK. Interventional Procedure Guideline 305. Issued July 2009;
        • R Development Core Team
        R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing.
        R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria2011

      Linked Article

      • Erratum
        The Journal of Foot and Ankle SurgeryVol. 53Issue 3
        • Preview
          In the November/December 2013 issue (volume 52, issue 6, pp 714–716) of The Journal of Foot & Ankle Surgery®, in the article “Computed Tomography Review of Tarsal Canal Anatomy with Reference to the Fitting of Sinus Tarsi Implants in the Tarsal Canal,” Figure 1 was incorrectly attributed to Osteotec of Dorset, UK. Although Orthotec is the distributer, in the UK, of this implant, and the representative of Orthotec did provide the image, Gramedica of Macomb, MI, is the maker of this implant and the copyright holder of this image.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF