Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The utility of ultrasonographic bone age determination in detecting growth disturbances; a comparative study with the conventional radiographic technique

  • Scientific Article
  • Published:
Skeletal Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To test whether the conventional radiographic technique in determining bone age abnormalities can be replaced by ultrasonography.

Materials and Methods

A total of 54 Caucasian subjects up to 7 years of age with clinically suspected growth problems underwent left hand and wrist radiographic and ultrasonographic bone age estimations with the use of the Greulich-Pyle atlas. The ultrasonographic scans targeted the ossification centers in the radius and ulna distal epiphysis, carpal bones, epiphyses of the first and third metacarpals, and epiphysis of the middle phalanx, as described in previous reports. The degree of agreement between the two sets of data, as well as the accuracy of the ultrasonographic method in detecting radiographically suggested bone age abnormities, was examined.

Results

The mean chronological age, radiographic bone age, and ultrasonographic bone age (all in months) were 41.96 ± 22.25, 26.68 ± 14.08, and 26.71 ± 13.50 in 28 boys and 43.62 ± 24.63, 30.12 ± 17.69, and 31.27 ± 18.06 in 26 girls, respectively. According to the Bland-Altman plot there was high agreement between the results of the two methods with only three outliers. The deviations in bone age from the chronological age taken by the two techniques had the same sign in all patients. Supposing radiography to be the method of reference, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of sonography in detecting growth abnormalities were all 100 % in males and 90.9, 100, 100, and 93.8 %, respectively, in females.

Conclusion

The conventional radiographic technique for determining bone age abnormalities could be replaced by ultrasonography.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mentzel HJ, Vilser C, Eulenstein M, Schwartz T, Vogt S, Bottcher J, et al. Assessment of skeletal age at the wrist in children with a new ultrasound device. Pediatr Radiol. 2005;35(4):429–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Daneff M, Casalis C, Bruno CH, Bruno DA. Bone age assessment with conventional ultrasonography in healthy infants from 1 to 24 months of age. Pediatr Radiol. 2015.

  3. Castriota-Scanderbeg A, Sacco MC, Emberti-Gialloreti L, Fraracci L. Skeletal age assessment in children and young adults: comparison between a newly developed sonographic method and conventional methods. Skelet Radiol. 1998;27(5):271–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wagner UA, Diedrich V, Schmitt O. Determination of skeletal maturity by ultrasound: a preliminary report. Skelet Radiol. 1995;24(6):417–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Nessi R, Garattini G, Bazzini E, Zaffaroni R, Lazzerini F. [Ultrasonography assessment of ossification foci of the wrist and pubertal growth spurt]. La Radiol Med. 1997;94(1–2):43–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Bilgili Y, Hizel S, Kara SA, Sanli C, Erdal HH, Altinok D. Accuracy of skeletal age assessment in children from birth to 6 years of age with the ultrasonographic version of the Greulich-Pyle atlas. J Ultrasound Med. 2003;22(7):683–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Khan KM, Miller BS, Hoggard E, Somani A, Sarafoglou K. Application of ultrasound for bone age estimation in clinical practice. J Pediatr. 2009;154(2):243–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Greulich WW, Pyle SI. Radiographic atlas of skeletal development of the hand and wrist. 2nd ed. Stanford: Stanford University Press; 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  9. van Rijn RR, Lequin MH, Robben SG, Hop WC, van Kuijk C. Is the Greulich and Pyle atlas still valid for Dutch Caucasian children today? Pediatr Radiol. 2001;31(10):748–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Horter MJ, Friesen S, Wacker S, Vogt B, Leidiger B, Roedl R, et al. [Determination of skeletal age : comparison of the methods of Greulich and Pyle and Tanner and Whitehouse]. Orthopade. 2012;41(12):966–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kreitner KF, Schweden FJ, Riepert T, Nafe B, Thelen M. Bone age determination based on the study of the medial extremity of the clavicle. Eur Radiol. 1998;8(7):1116–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Khan KM, Sarafoglou K, Somani A, Frohnert B, Miller BS. Can ultrasound be used to estimate bone mineral density in children with growth problems? Acta Paediatr. 2013;102(9):e407–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Koc A, Karaoglanoglu M, Erdogan M, Kosecik M, Cesur Y. Assessment of bone ages: is the Greulich-Pyle method sufficient for Turkish boys? Pediatr Int. 2001;43(6):662–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Buken B, Safak AA, Yazici B, Buken E, Mayda AS. Is the assessment of bone age by the Greulich-Pyle method reliable at forensic age estimation for Turkish children? Forensic Sci Int. 2007;173(2–3):146–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Patil ST, Parchand MP, Meshram MM, Kamdi NY. Applicability of Greulich and Pyle skeletal age standards to Indian children. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;216(1–3):200 e201–204.

  16. Hackman L, Black S. The reliability of the Greulich and Pyle atlas when applied to a modern Scottish population. J Forensic Sci. 2013;58(1):114–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang A, Sayre JW, Vachon L, Liu BJ, Huang HK. Racial differences in growth patterns of children assessed on the basis of bone age. Radiology. 2009;250(1):228–35.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Moradi M, Sirous M, Morovatti P. The reliability of skeletal age determination in an Iranian sample using Greulich and Pyle method. Forensic Sci Int. 2012;223(1–3):372 e371–374.

  19. Zabet D, Rerolle C, Pucheux J, Telmon N, Saint-Martin P. Can the Greulich and Pyle method be used on French contemporary individuals? Int J Legal Med. 2015;129(1):171–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mansourvar M, Ismail MA, Raj RG, Kareem SA, Aik S, Gunalan R, et al. The applicability of Greulich and Pyle atlas to assess skeletal age for four ethnic groups. J Forensic Leg Med. 2014;22:26–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Altman DG, Bland JM. Measurement in medicine: the analysis of method comparison studies. Statistician. 1983;32(3):307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Carpenter CT, Lester EL. Skeletal age determination in young children: analysis of three regions of the hand/wrist film. J Pediatr Orthop. 1993;13(1):76–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Imam Reza Teaching Hospital, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Parisa Hajalioghli, Mohammad Kazem Tarzamni & Sara Arami

  2. Neurosciences Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Daniel Fadaei Fouladi

  3. Department of Physiology, School of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

    Morteza Ghojazadeh

  4. Neurosciences Research Center, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Imam Reza Teaching Hospital, Golgasht Street, Tabriz, Iran, P.O. Box 5166614756

    Daniel Fadaei Fouladi

Authors
  1. Parisa Hajalioghli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Kazem Tarzamni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sara Arami
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel Fadaei Fouladi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Morteza Ghojazadeh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Fadaei Fouladi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hajalioghli, P., Tarzamni, M.K., Arami, S. et al. The utility of ultrasonographic bone age determination in detecting growth disturbances; a comparative study with the conventional radiographic technique. Skeletal Radiol 44, 1351–1356 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2175-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-015-2175-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation