Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Two widely used bone age assessment (BAA) methods<b>—</b>Greulich-Pyle (GP) and Tanner-Whitehouse 3 (TW3) methods—differ in complexity, accuracy, and clinical utility.</p> Objective <p>To compare GP and TW3 bone age estimations and assess inter- and intra-observer agreement between pediatric radiologists and endocrinologists.</p> Methods <p>This retrospective study analyzed 1,725 left-hand radiographs of children aged 0–19 years (2008–2022). Twelve experts (six radiologists, six endocrinologists) independently assessed bone age using GP and TW3 radius-ulnar-short bones (RUS) methods following standardized training. Assessment time and method preference were recorded. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland–Altman analysis, and comparative tests (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05).</p> Results <p>GP estimates ranged from 6 to 228 months, whereas TW3-RUS estimates were slightly lower due to age-range limitations. Inter- and intra-observer reliability were excellent for both methods (ICC &gt; 0.9). Mean bone age did not differ significantly between specialties using GP, whereas minor differences were observed with TW3-RUS for overall (<i>p &lt;</i> 0.001) and when stratified by sex (males <i>p =</i> 0.016, female <i>p</i> = 0.005). Age-stratified analysis demonstrated low mean absolute differences (MAD) between specialties across most age groups, with slightly greater variability in 84.1–180 months. MAD between GP and TW3-RUS was modest in most age groups (approximately 2.5–3.3 months) but increased in older adolescents, particularly ≥ 180 months. GP assessments were significantly faster than TW3-RUS (<i>p</i> = 0.002). Experts preferred GP for routine use due to speed and ease, while TW3-RUS offered greater accuracy, specificity, and detail for complex and borderline cases.</p> Conclusions <p>Both specialists demonstrated excellent agreement using both GP and TW3-RUS. We recommend GP as the primary method, reserving TW3-RUS for complex cases. Moreover, developing a GP-analog atlas with narrower, finely defined age intervals may improve clinical applicability.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Bone age assessment: comparative analysis of Greulich-Pyle and Tanner-Whitehouse 3 by pediatric radiologists and endocrinologists

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月18日

查看全文
  • Nipaporn Tewattanarat,
  • Wichuda Chaisiwamongkol,
  • Pitchaya Wiratchotisatian,
  • Sarun Paisarnsrisomsuk,
  • Panawit Hanpinitsak,
  • Kwankhao Tangprasert,
  • Chanakarn Poonpol,
  • Chatparin Pansukrada,
  • Wilairat Thaowandee,
  • Ratikorn Chaisiwamongkol

摘要

Introduction

Two widely used bone age assessment (BAA) methods—Greulich-Pyle (GP) and Tanner-Whitehouse 3 (TW3) methods—differ in complexity, accuracy, and clinical utility.

Objective

To compare GP and TW3 bone age estimations and assess inter- and intra-observer agreement between pediatric radiologists and endocrinologists.

Methods

This retrospective study analyzed 1,725 left-hand radiographs of children aged 0–19 years (2008–2022). Twelve experts (six radiologists, six endocrinologists) independently assessed bone age using GP and TW3 radius-ulnar-short bones (RUS) methods following standardized training. Assessment time and method preference were recorded. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), Bland–Altman analysis, and comparative tests (p < 0.05).

Results

GP estimates ranged from 6 to 228 months, whereas TW3-RUS estimates were slightly lower due to age-range limitations. Inter- and intra-observer reliability were excellent for both methods (ICC > 0.9). Mean bone age did not differ significantly between specialties using GP, whereas minor differences were observed with TW3-RUS for overall (p < 0.001) and when stratified by sex (males p = 0.016, female p = 0.005). Age-stratified analysis demonstrated low mean absolute differences (MAD) between specialties across most age groups, with slightly greater variability in 84.1–180 months. MAD between GP and TW3-RUS was modest in most age groups (approximately 2.5–3.3 months) but increased in older adolescents, particularly ≥ 180 months. GP assessments were significantly faster than TW3-RUS (p = 0.002). Experts preferred GP for routine use due to speed and ease, while TW3-RUS offered greater accuracy, specificity, and detail for complex and borderline cases.

Conclusions

Both specialists demonstrated excellent agreement using both GP and TW3-RUS. We recommend GP as the primary method, reserving TW3-RUS for complex cases. Moreover, developing a GP-analog atlas with narrower, finely defined age intervals may improve clinical applicability.