Assessment of skeletal age at the wrist in children with a new ultrasound device.
BACKGROUND
Determination of skeletal development in children is important. The most common method of evaluation uses the standards of Greulich and Pyle (G and P) to assess the left hand radiograph. Numerous assessments may be made during follow-up.


OBJECTIVE
The aim of our study was to compare the accuracy of a new sonographic method with the standard radiographic method.


METHODS
Seventy consecutive patients (age 6-17 years; 34 girls, 36 boys) underwent radiography of the left hand, followed by sonographic examination of the same hand using the BonAge system (Sunlight Medical Ltd., Israel). This system evaluates the relationship between the velocity of sound passing thorough the distal radial and ulna epiphysis and growth, using gender- and ethnicity-based algorithms. One experienced paediatric radiologist analysed the radiograph and assigned bone age scores based on the G and P atlas for the whole left hand and for the distal radius alone. The radiologist was blinded to the chronological age (CA), height of the patient and the BonAge result. Correlation between BonAge and G and P was undertaken.


RESULTS
In 65 patients, BonAge measurement could be performed successfully. In five patients, the scanning process was impossible using the ultrasound device. The r(2) (r is the Pearson correlation coefficient) of the BonAge ultrasound measurement and the G and P method was 0.82. The averaged accuracy (i.e. absolute difference in years between G and P reading and BonAge ultrasonic results) was calculated. Results were similar for boys and girls: 1.0+/-0.8 years for the whole left hand and 0.8+/-0.7 year for the distal radius. On average, the difference between BonAge and CA is the same as the difference between G and P and CA, i.e. 1.4 years.


CONCLUSIONS
The BonAge device demonstrates the ability of ultrasound to produce an accurate assessment of bone age. The results are highly correlated with skeletal age evaluated conventionally using the G and P method. Obvious advantages of the ultrasound device are objectivity, lack of ionizing radiation, and easy accessibility.
Mentzel
Hans-J
HJ
Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Friedrich-Schiller-University, Bachstrasse 18, 07740 Jena, Germany. hans-joachim.mentzel@med.uni-jena.de
Vilser
Claudia
C
Eulenstein
Marcus
M
Schwartz
Tseela
T
Vogt
Susanna
S
Böttcher
Joachim
J
Yaniv
Irit
I
Tsoref
Liat
L
Kauf
Eberhard
E
Kaiser
Werner A
WA
D000293:Adolescent; D000365:Age Determination by Skeleton / Q000379:methods*; D002348:Carpal Bones / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000254:growth & development; D002648:Child; D004838:Epiphyses / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D005006:Ethnicity; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011884:Radius / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D012737:Sex Factors; D016037:Single-Blind Method; D014457:Ulna / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D014463:Ultrasonography; D014953:Wrist / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging
Skeletal Radiol. 1995 Apr;24(3):197-200
7541917
Skeletal Radiol. 1995 Aug;24(6):417-20
7481897
Skeletal Radiol. 1998 May;27(5):271-7
9638838
Eur Radiol. 1998;8(7):1116-22
9724422
Br J Radiol. 1999 May;72(857):461-4
10505010
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1996 Dec;167(6):1395-8
8956565
Am J Dis Child. 1993 Dec;147(12 ):1329-33
8249956
Arch Dis Child. 1983 Oct;58(10 ):761-3
6639120
Pediatr Radiol. 2001 Oct;31(10 ):748-52
11685448
Acta Anat (Basel). 1996;155(3):206-11
8870789
J Ultrasound Med. 2003 Jul;22(7):683-90
12862266