Aims. A local injection may be used as an early option in the treatment of Morton’s neuroma, and can be performed using various medications. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of injections of hyaluronic acid compared with corticosteroid in the treatment of this condition. Methods. A total of 91 patients were assessed for this trial, of whom 45 were subsequently included and randomized into two groups. One patient was lost to follow-up, leaving 22 patients (24 feet) in each group. The patients in the hyaluronic acid group were treated with three ultrasound-guided injections (one per week) of hyaluronic acid (Osteonil Plus). Those in the corticosteroid group were treated with three ultrasound-guided injections (also one per week) of triamcinolone (Triancil). The patients were evaluated before treatment and at one, three, six, and 12 months after treatment. The primary outcome measure was the visual analogue scale for pain (VAS). Secondary outcome measures included the American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS) score, and complications. Results. Both groups showed significant improvement in VAS and AOFAS scores (p < 0.05) after 12 months. The corticosteroid group had a significantly greater reduction in VAS and increase in AOFAS scores compared with the hyaluronic acid group, at one, three, and six months, but with no significant difference at 12 months. There were no complications in the hyaluronic acid group. There were minor local complications in six patients (six feet) (25.0%) in the corticosteroid group, all with discolouration of the skin at the site of the injection. These minor complications might have been due to the three weekly injections of a relatively high dose of corticosteroid. No patient subsequently underwent excision of the neuroma. Conclusion. An ultrasound-guided corticosteroid injection showed statistically significantly better functional and pain outcomes than an ultrasound-guided injection of hyaluronic acid for the treatment of a Morton’s neuroma at many timepoints. Thus, a corticosteroid injection should be regarded as a primary option in the treatment of these patients, and the only indication for an injection of hyaluronic acid might be in patients in whom corticosteroid is contraindicated. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1093–1099

Background. Infiltration is considered the first treatment option for symptomatic Morton's neuroma and can be performed with various medications. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of hyaluronic acid infiltration versus corticosteroid injection in the treatment of Morton's neuroma. Methods. A randomised clinical trial was conducted with 46 patients (50 feet) diagnosed with Morton's neuroma. After randomisation, the control group (CG) received three injections (one per week) of triamcinolone (Triancil®) guided by ultrasound, while the study group (SG) received three applications of hyaluronic acid (Osteonil Plus®). Patients were followed up for six months after the intervention. The primary outcome measure used was the Visual Pain Analog Scale (VAS). Secondary endpoints included patient-reported outcome measures using the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society (AOFAS) score and complications. Results. Both groups showed significant improvement in VAS and AOFAS scores (p < 0.001). The CG showed greater improvement than the SG in the VAS (p < 0.05) and AOFAS (p < 0.001) variables. Four patients in the CG experienced skin hypochromia at the injection site, while there were no complications in the SG. Conclusion. Ultrasound-guided hyaluronic acid infiltration in Morton's Neuroma proved to be safe, showing improvement in pain and function after six months of follow-up, without major complications, but with a significantly lower improvement when compared to corticosteroid injection. Taking into account cost implications and the potential for longer lasting improvement from viscosupplementation further medium- and long-term studies are needed

Introduction:. Symptomatic treatment of ankle osteoarthritis (OA) with corticosteroid injections is well established. Hyaluronic acid is also reported as an effective symptomatic treatment for ankle OA but these two treatments have not been compared directly. Methods:. A prospective randomised controlled trial in patients with symptomatic ankle osteoarthritis. Twenty patients per group were required based on a significance level of 0.05, and a drop out rate of 5%. Patients were blindly allocated to the treatment or control group. Injections were carried out by the clinician in the outpatient department. Treatment group received Ostenil 20 mg and control group received Depomedrone 40 mg (both as single injections). The treatment arm was allocated by computer generated block randomization to match treatment allocation with grade of arthritis. The primary outcome measure was the change in Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score at 6 months. Secondary outcome was the change in AOFAS score at 6 months. Research ethics committee approval was obtained. Results:. A total of 42 patients were recruited of which 38 completed the study. Male recruits predominated (79%; 33 recruits). More than 70% had radiographic OA of grade 3 or more. Both groups demonstrated statistically significant improvements in VAS at weeks 3, 6, and 3 months over baseline, but the Ostenil group faired better at 6 months follow-up. (difference in VAS scores of 3.5 Ostenil VAS − 4; Steroid VAS − 7.5; Mann Whitney test (p<=0.05). There was no statistical difference in AOFAS scores between both groups at baseline and follow-up (p=0.48, Mann Whitney test). No complications noted. 30% of patients have had their surgical procedures delayed for 6 month post injection. Conclusion:. The Ostenil group revealed similar clinical efficacy to steroid group, however the benefits provided by Ostenil lasted longer. Ostenil provided sufficient mid-term pain-relief whilst patient awaits further definitive intervention

Introduction. Injections are used to treat a wide variety of pathologies. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of foot and ankle injections in our clinic. Materials and methods. We performed a retrospective review of notes and a telephone questionnaire audit into the clinical outcome of all patients who underwent an injection of the foot or ankle in a year. All procedures were performed in an out-patient setting by a consultant musculoskeletal radiologist using either ultrasound or X-ray guidance, with a minimum of two year follow-up. According to the pathology treated, the type of injection included depomedrone, hyaluronic acid and high volume saline injections. Results. Overall 410/446 (92%) patients reported a significant improvement in symptoms and 227 (62%) reported complete resolution of their pain, with 127 (28%) remaining asymptomatic at two year follow-up. The mode time of recurrence of pain was three months. 59 (13%) underwent a further injection and 102 (23%) underwent operative intervention within the follow-up period. There were no reported infections. Complications occurred in two percent of patients, including steroid flare, pain and plantar plate ruptures. Conclusion. Injections are a safe and effective option for treating a variety of foot and ankle conditions and reduce the need for surgery. They are particularly effective for the treatment of ankle soft tissue impingement. They appear ineffective in providing significant improvement in pain for longer than three months in conditions such as plantar fasciitis and hallux rigidus