| Literature DB >> 24967289 |
Shao-Yan Zhang1, Gang Liu1, Chen-Guo Ma2, Yi-San Han3, Xun-Zhang Shen4, Rui-Long Xu5, Hans Henrik Thodberg6.
Abstract
Rationale and Objective. Large studies have previously been performed to set up a Chinese bone age reference, but it has been difficult to compare the maturation of Chinese children with populations elsewhere due to the potential variability between raters in different parts of the world. We re-analysed the radiographs from a large study of normal Chinese children using an automated bone age rating method to establish a Chinese bone age reference, and to compare the tempo of maturation in the Chinese with other populations. Materials and Methods. X-rays from 2883 boys and 3143 girls aged 2-20 years from five Chinese cities, taken in 2005, were evaluated using the BoneXpert automated method. Results. Chinese children reached full maturity at the same age as previously studied Asian children from Los Angeles, but 0.6 years earlier than Caucasian children in Los Angeles. The Greulich-Pyle bone age method was adapted to the Chinese population creating a new bone age scale BX-China05. The standard deviation between BX-China05 and chronologic age was 1.01 years in boys aged 8-14, and 1.08 years in girls aged 7-12. Conclusion. By eliminating rater variability, the automated method provides a reliable and efficient standard for bone age determination in China.Entities:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24967289 PMCID: PMC4045514 DOI: 10.5402/2013/874570
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ISRN Radiol ISSN: 2314-4084
Figure 2The difference between Greulich-Pyle bone age and chronological age, shown versus age. The data have been spread a bit around the true age for better display. The solid line indicates the average at each age, while the short dashed lines are drawn at the mean value plus or minus two SDs at each age. The Shanghai and Dalian curves are the mean values for these two cities.
Figure 1Bland-Altman plot showing the difference between the automated and the manual TW3 bone age ratings of 6062 Chinese children and adolescents. The black curve is a running average.
Figure 3The average Greulich-Pyle bone age minus age for children from five different cities in China.
Figure 4Comparison of Greulich-Pyle bone age minus age for children of various ethnicities. The upper two plots compare four ethnicities in Los Angeles while the lower plots compare Asians in Los Angeles and China.
This table is used to transform an observed Greulich-Pyle bone age (GP BA) into the bone age scale BX-China05, adapted to Chinese children in 2005. The Boys column indicates the correction for boys, and similarly for the Girls column. Example: A girl with GP BA = 10 y has BX-China05 = 10 − 0.1 = 9.9 years.
| GP BA (years) | BX-China05 Correction (years) | |
|---|---|---|
| Boys | Girls | |
| 2.0 | 0.0 | −0.2 |
| 2.5 | −0.1 | −0.2 |
| 3.0 | −0.2 | 0.1 |
| 3.5 | −0.2 | 0.3 |
| 4.0 | −0.1 | 0.4 |
| 4.5 | −0.0 | 0.4 |
| 5.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 |
| 5.5 | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| 6.0 | 0.2 | −0.1 |
| 6.5 | 0.3 | −0.1 |
| 7.0 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
| 7.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 |
| 8.0 | 0.5 | 0.2 |
| 8.5 | 0.4 | 0.1 |
| 9.0 | 0.3 | −0.0 |
| 9.5 | 0.2 | −0.1 |
| 10.0 | 0.1 | −0.1 |
| 10.5 | 0.0 | −0.2 |
| 11.0 | −0.1 | −0.2 |
| 11.5 | −0.2 | −0.3 |
| 12.0 | −0.4 | −0.5 |
| 12.5 | −0.5 | −0.6 |
| 13.0 | −0.4 | −0.7 |
| 13.5 | −0.4 | −0.8 |
| 14.0 | −0.4 | −0.9 |
| 14.5 | −0.5 | −1.0 |
| 15.0 | −0.7 | −1.2 |
| 15.5 | −0.9 | −1.2 |
| 16.0 | −1.0 | −1.1 |
| 16.5 | −1.1 | −1.1 |
| 17.0 and above | −1.2 | −1.2 |
Figure 5Difference between the new bone age scale BX-China05 and age. BX-China05 is an adaptation of Greulich-Pyle bone age method to Chinese children in 2005.
The correspondence between TW-China05 bone age and SMS. Example: A boy with SMS = 296 has TW-China05 = 10 years.
| TW-China05 Bone age | SMS |
|---|---|
| Boys | |
|
| |
| 2.0 | 79 |
| 2.5 | 98 |
| 3.0 | 117 |
| 3.5 | 123 |
| 4.0 | 134 |
| 5.0 | 156 |
| 6.0 | 180 |
| 7.0 | 209 |
| 8.0 | 239 |
| 9.0 | 262 |
| 10.0 | 296 |
| 11.0 | 345 |
| 12.0 | 426 |
| 13.0 | 517 |
| 14.0 | 642 |
| 15.0 | 835 |
| 16.0 | 959 |
| 16.1 | 1000 |
|
| |
| Girls | |
|
| |
| 2.0 | 162 |
| 2.5 | 174 |
| 3.0 | 188 |
| 3.5 | 201 |
| 4.0 | 210 |
| 5.0 | 231 |
| 6.0 | 264 |
| 7.0 | 306 |
| 8.0 | 347 |
| 9.0 | 420 |
| 10.0 | 496 |
| 11.0 | 593 |
| 12.0 | 700 |
| 13.0 | 861 |
| 14.0 | 956 |
| 15.0 | 986 |
| 15.1 | 1000 |
Figure 6Comparison of manual and automated TW-China05 bone age ratings.