Evidence Hub

MRI Distribution of Foot Bone Marrow Edema of Presumed Algodystrophic/BMES-Like Origin: A Small Retrospective Case Series with 3-Month Clinical Follow-Up

Messina F, D'Arrigo C, Bonifacio M, di Niccolo R, Cipolloni V, Musorrofiti MG, Saggini R, Oliva M et al.

Journal of clinical medicine, 2026

19 participants

Abstract

Background and Objectives: Foot bone marrow edema of presumed algodystrophic or bone marrow edema syndrome-like origin is clinically difficult to classify, and the relationship between MRI extent, pain severity, and functional impairment remains insufficiently defined. This study aimed to describe MRI distribution patterns and short-term clinical changes in a small real-world cohort of patients with persistent NSAID-resistant foot pain and presumed algodystrophic/BMES-like bone marrow edema. Materials and Methods: This retrospective single-center observational cohort study included 19 consecutive patients with persistent foot pain; MRI-demonstrated bone marrow edema; inadequate response to NSAIDs; management with a multimodal protocol that included neridronate, vitamin D supplementation, and, in selected patients, adjunctive physiotherapy and magnetotherapy; and available 3-month follow-up. The protocol consisted of intramuscular neridronate 25 mg once daily for 16 consecutive days, resulting in a total cumulative dose of 400 mg, together with vitamin D supplementation. Eleven patients also underwent adjunctive physiotherapy and magnetotherapy. MRI findings were categorized by anatomical location group, multilocalization, and compartment involvement. Clinical outcomes included baseline and 3-month Visual Analog Scale scores, WOMAC scores, and descriptive changes in NSAID use. Nonparametric paired and exploratory subgroup analyses were performed. Results: Mean age was 51.3 ±…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 19 participants or records.

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