Imaging Techniques in Bone Analysis

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-51726-1_157-2

Introduction

The main medical radiological imaging techniques used for forensic examination of skeletal material may be summarized as follows:
  • Radiography: The term radiography is generally used to describe a static or “still” two-dimensional image produced by means of a single exposure to X-rays (an energy form of ionizing radiation). Such images are now usually recorded and stored digitally but were previously recorded photographically on X-ray film.

  • Fluoroscopy: The term fluoroscopy is used to describe a two-dimensional image directly visualized in real-time motion produced by a continuous exposure to X-rays.

  • Tomography: Tomography employs a moving X-ray tube and image receptor to create an image of a plane or “slice” within an object. Originally developed in the 1930s to overcome the limitations of radiography as a two-dimensional imaging method, the application of digital detectors and computer science led to the development of:

  • Computed Axial Tomography: CAT or CT scanning...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References

  1. Alexander, C.J., and G.A. Foote. 1998. Radiology in forensic identification: The Mt Erebus disaster. Australasian Radiology 42 (4): 321–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brogdon, B.G. 2011a. Radiological identification: Anthropological parameters. In Brogdon’s forensic radiology, ed. M.J. Thali, M.D. Viner, and B.G. Brogdon, 2nd ed., 85–106. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brogdon, B.G. 2011b. Radiological identification of individual remains. In Brogdon’s forensic radiology, ed. M.J. Thali, M.D. Viner, and B.G. Brogdon, 2nd ed., 153–176. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  4. Brogdon, B.G., H. Vogel, and J.D. McDowell. 2003. A radiologic atlas of abuse, torture, terrorism, and inflicted trauma. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buck, U., S. Nather, and M.J. Thali. 2011. Using real 3D data for reconstruction. In Brogdon’s forensic radiology, ed. M.J. Thali, M.D. Viner, and B.G. Brogdon, 2nd ed., 461–472. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  6. Catapano, A., J. Curry, R. Gonzalez, G. Conlogue, M. Viner, D. Piombino-Mascali, and R. Beckett. 2016. A differential diagnosis of spinal pathology among the Gangi mummies. 42nd Annual Meeting of the Paleopathology Association. Atlanta, Georga.Google Scholar
  7. Chilvarquer, I., J.O. Katz, D.M. Glassman, T.J. Prihoda, and J.A. Cottone. 1987. Comparative radiographic study of human and animal long bone patterns. Journal of Forensic Science 32 (6): 1645–1654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conlogue, G., and R. Beckett. 2010. Conventional radiography. In Paleoimaging: Field applications for cultural remains and artifacts, ed. R.G. Beckett and G. Conlogue. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  9. Conlogue, G., and F. Marcinowski. 1986. Microradiography: A theoretical basis and practical applications. Radiologic Technology 58: 301–309.Google Scholar
  10. Conlogue, G., T. Blyth, J. Li, R. Beckett, A. Dhody, R. Gonzalez, F. Cerrone, and M. Schlenk. 2010. Revealing rer secrets one modality at a time. Paper presented at the 37th Annual North American Paleopathology Association meeting, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
  11. DiCesare, A., D. Piombino-Mascali, R. Beckett, M. Viner, G. Conlogue, A. Catapano, J. Curry, and K. Harper-Beckett. 2016. Implementation of dual imaging stations to achieve increased productivity for a large scale radiographic examination of mummified remains. 42nd Annual Meeting of the Paleopathology Association. Atlanta, Georga. Google Scholar
  12. Fehren-Schmits, L., J. Kapp, K.L. Ziegler, K.M. Harkin, G.P. Aronson, and G. Conlogue. 2016. An investigation into the effects of X-ray on the recovery of ancient DNA from skeletal remains. Journal of Archaeological Science 76: 1–8.Google Scholar
  13. Harcke, H.T., J.A. Bifano, and K.K. Koeller. 2002. Forensic radiology: Response to the Pentagon Attack on September 11, 2001. Radiology 223 (1): 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kahana, T., and J. Hiss. 1997. Identification of human remains: Forensic radiology. Journal of Clinical Forensic Medicine 4 (1): 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Nather, S., U. Buck, and M.J. Thali. 2011. Photogrametry based optical scanning. In Brogdon’s forensic radiology, ed. M.J. Thali, M.D. Viner, and B.G. Brogdon, 2nd ed., 365–388. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  16. Tonello, B. 1998. Mass grave investigations. Paper presented at the Imaging Science & Oncology, British Institute of Radiology, Birmingham, UK.Google Scholar
  17. Viner, M.D. 2008. The use of radiology in mass fatality incidents. In Recovery, analysis and identification of co-mingled human remains, ed. B. Adams and J. Byrd, 145–179. Totowa: Humana Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Viner, M.D., and J.E. Lichtenstein. 2011. Radiology in mass casualty situations. In Brogdon’s forensic radiology, ed. M.J. Thali, M.D. Viner, and B.G. Brogdon, 2nd ed., 177–198. Boca Raton: CRC Press.Google Scholar
  19. Wessling, R., and L. Loe. 2011. The Fromelles Project: Organizational and operational structures of a large scale mass grave excavation and on-site anthropological analysis. Paper presented at the American Academy of Forensic Sciences 63rd scientific meeting, Chicago.Google Scholar
  20. Ziegler K.L., G. Conlogue, R. Beckett, T. Blyth, G.P. Aronson, and L. Fehren-Schmitz. 2013. An investigation into effects of x-ray on the recovery of DNA from skeletal remains. Am J Phys Anthropol 150 (S56): 299.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bioarchaology Research InstituteQuinnipiac UniversityMount CarmelUSA
  2. 2.Cranfield Forensic InstituteCranfield UniversityShrivenhamUK
  3. 3.Institute of DentistryBarts & The London School of Medicine & Dentistry, Queen Mary University of LondonLondonUK

Section editors and affiliations

  • Soren Blau
    • 1
  • Luis Fondebrider
    • 2
  • Douglas H. Ubelaker
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Forensic MedicineVictorian Institute of Forensic Medicine / Monash UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.The Argentine Forensic Anthropology Team (Equipo Argentino de Antropología Forense, EAAF)Buenos AiresArgentina
  3. 3.National Museum of Natural HistorySmithsonian InstitutionWashingtonUSA