Evidence Hub

Navicular fractures in elite athletes-2025 International Foot and Ankle Sports Consensus and systematic review

Webber KJ, Boggiano VJ, Balboni JM, Semelsberger SD, Moran J, Mast P, Vasquez A, Gianakos AL et al.

Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2026

1 citation

Abstract

Purpose: Navicular injuries are a significant concern in athletics, often leading to prolonged recovery periods and risks of further complications. Navicular stress fractures, in particular, have gained recognition as common injuries among athletes, especially in high-impact sports. The management of navicular injuries remains controversial, lacking standardised treatment protocols. The purpose of the present systematic review and consensus process was to provide up-to-date recommendations on workup and diagnosis, operative and nonoperative treatments, and the return-to-sport (RTS) for elite athletes with navicular fractures.

Methods: A consensus process was conducted using a modified Delphi technique with two rounds of questionnaires. 'General consensus' was defined as 75%-85% agreement, 'strong consensus' as 86%-99% agreement, and 'unanimous consensus' as 100% agreement. In addition, a systematic review was conducted evaluating the workup, treatment and postoperative management of Navicular injuries in athletes.

Results: Thirty-four consensus statements were established regarding the diagnosis, management and RTS following navicular fractures in elite athletes; 10 achieved unanimous consensus, 21 reached strong consensus and 2 did not reach consensus. Across 319 athletes identified in the systematic review, those treated surgically returned to sport at a mean of 8.2 weeks postoperatively, with 98.7% resuming competition. The panel reached a strong consensus that athletes…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free