Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Online software Boneureka assessing bone age based on metacarpal length in healthy children: proof-of-concept study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Bone age in children is mainly assessed using the Greulich and Pyle (GP) atlas, a validated method with limited interobserver accuracy. While automated methods increase interobserver accuracy, they represent considerable costs and technical requirements.

Objective

A proof-of-concept study to create and evaluate an online software program, Boneureka©, based on linear metacarpal length measurements, to assess bone age in healthy children.

Materials and methods

The study retrospectively included 434 consecutive children (215 girls) who underwent a left-hand radiograph to rule out trauma between March 2008 and December 2017. Two reviewers measured the second to fourth metacarpal lengths on each radiograph and the distance between the centre of the epiphyses of the second and fifth metacarpals. A single reviewer estimated the bone age using the GP atlas. The automated software assessed the bone age for all radiographs. A mathematical model was developed based on linear regressions to provide the mean bone age and standard deviation based on the estimates. Pearson and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) were used to evaluate the correlation and agreement between the estimated bone ages using Boneureka©, the GP atlas and BoneXpert® compared to chronological age.

Results

The measure that showed the highest correlation (r2=0.877 for girls and r2=0.834 for boys; P<.001) and the highest ICC (ICC=0.937 for girls and ICC=0.926 for boys; P<0.001) with chronological age was length of the second metacarpal. The GP atlas and the automated software evaluation had excellent ICC with chronological age (ICC>0.95 for both methods and sexes). Using this data, we created an online software program based on the second metacarpal length to obtain bone age estimates, means and standard deviations.

Conclusion

The newly created online software Boneureka,© based on the second metacarpal length, is a reliable and user-friendly tool to assess bone age in healthy children. Further studies on a larger population should be performed to validate the developed reference values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Vicente Gilsanz, Osman Ratib (2005) Hand bone age, Springer. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg New York, Germany

  2. Greulich WW, Pyle SI (1959) Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist, 2nd edition. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA

  3. Tanner J, Whitehouse R, Cameron N et al (1983) Assessment of Skeletal maturity and prediction of adult height, 2nd edn. Academic Press, London

  4. Bull RK, Edwards PD, Kemp PM et al (1999) Bone age assessment: a large scale comparison of the Greulich and Pyle, and Tanner and Whitehouse (TW2) methods. Arch Dis Child 81:172–173

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. De Sanctis V, Soliman AT, Di Maio S et al (2014) Are the new automated methods for bone age estimation advantageous over the manual approaches? Pediatr Endocrinol Rev PER 12:200–205

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Thodberg HH (2009) An automated method for determination of bone age. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 94:2239–2244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Boitsios G, Leucio AD, Preziosi M et al (2021) Are automated and visual Greulich and Pyle-based methods applicable to Caucasian European children with a Moroccan ethnic origin when assessing bone age? Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.13478

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. van Rijn RR, Thodberg HH (2013) Bone age assessment: automated techniques coming of age? Acta Radiol Stockh Swed 1987 54:1024–1029

  9. Eng DK, Khandwala NB, Long J et al (2021) Artificial intelligence algorithm improves radiologist performance in skeletal age assessment: a prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial. Radiology 301:692–699

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Martin DD, Heckmann C, Jenni OG et al (2011) Metacarpal thickness, width, length and medullary diameter in children–reference curves from the First Zürich Longitudinal Study. Osteoporos Int J Establ Result Coop Eur Found Osteoporos Natl Osteoporos Found USA 22:1525–1536

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Haghnegahdar A, Pakshir H, Ghanbari I (2019) Correlation between skeletal age and metacarpal bones and metacarpophalangeal joints dimensions. J Dent Shiraz Iran 20:159–164

  12. Tsai A, Stamoulis C, Bixby SD et al (2016) Infant bone age estimation based on fibular shaft length: model development and clinical validation. Pediatr Radiol 46:342–356

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rosner B (2016) Fundamentals of biostatistics, 8th edition. Cengage Learning, Boston, MA

  14. Bayley N, Pinneau SR (1952) Tables for predicting adult height from skeletal age: revised for use with the greulich-pyle hand standards. J Pediatr 40:423–441

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Zhang A, Sayre JW, Vachon L et al (2009) Racial differences in growth patterns of children assessed on the basis of bone age1. Radiology 250:228–235

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Martin DD, Heckmann C, Jenni OG et al (2011) Metacarpal thickness, width, length and medullary diameter in children—reference curves from the First Zürich Longitudinal Study. Osteoporos Int 22:1525–1536

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Paediatric Imaging, Queen Fabiola’s Children Hospital (HUDERF), Free University of Brussels, Avenue Jean Joseph Crocq 15, 1020, Brussels, Belgium

    Grammatina Boitsios, Ayoub Mokhtari, Federico De Lucia & Paolo Simoni

  2. Faculty of Medecine, Free University of Brussels, Brussels, Belgium

    Giovanni Briganti

  3. Laboratoire de Psychologie Médicale, CHU Brugmann, Faculté de Médecine, ULB, Brussels, Belgium

    Giovanni Briganti

  4. Institut de Psychiatrie et Psychologie Médicale, CHU Brugmann, Faculté de Médecine, ULB, Brussels, Belgium

    Giovanni Briganti

  5. Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA

    Giovanni Briganti

  6. Chair of AI and Digital Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Mons, Mons, Belgium

    Giovanni Briganti

  7. Department of Radiology, Auckland City Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand

    Maria Pilar Aparisi Gómez

  8. Department of Radiology, Hospital Vithas Nueve de Octubre, Valencia, Spain

    Maria Pilar Aparisi Gómez

Authors
  1. Grammatina Boitsios
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Giovanni Briganti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ayoub Mokhtari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Federico De Lucia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Maria Pilar Aparisi Gómez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Paolo Simoni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grammatina Boitsios.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest

None

Ethics approval

This study was performed in line with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and institutional Ethics Committee approval.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was waived due to the retrospective and observational nature of the study.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boitsios, G., Briganti, G., Mokhtari, A. et al. Online software Boneureka assessing bone age based on metacarpal length in healthy children: proof-of-concept study. Pediatr Radiol 53, 1100–1107 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05595-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-023-05595-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation