Background: Traditionally, the bone maturity at birth has been estimated from the radiological presence and size of the ossified distal femoral epiphysis. This study was conducted in a search for a sonographic tool for the evaluation of neonatal bone maturity. Methods: We examined sonographically 256 neonates within 24 h of birth. Gestational ages ranged from 36 to 42 weeks (mean: 39.4; median: 40). Birth weights ranged from 1,945 to 5,000 g (mean: 3,175; median: 3,180). The distal femoral epiphysis was imaged on the coronal plane sonogram of the distal femur with the knee at 90° flexion and the distal femoral epiphysis maximal height was recorded. The acetabulum was imaged using Graf’s method in the coronal plane image and the acetabular diameter recorded. Results: It was found that plotting the distal femoral epiphysis against neonatal birth weight and gestational age provided a simple method for assessing the bone maturity. According to our study, a neonate can be regarded as bone maturity percentile X when plotting distal femoral epiphysis height or acetabulum diameter against birth weight and gestational age or when averaging the four readings. Conclusions: We suggest performing sonography of the distal femoral epiphysis as a bedside tool for the assessment of skeletal maturity in newborns.

Keywords:
Acetabulum, Bone maturity, Distal femoral epiphysis secondary ossification center, Newborn, Sonography
1.
Virtanen M, Perheentupa J: Bone age at birth: Method and effect of hypothyroidism. Acta Paediatr Scand 1989;78:412–418.
2.
Silverman FN, Kuhn JP (eds): Caffey’s Pediatric X-Ray diagnosis, ed 9. St. Louis, Mosby, 1993, vol 2, p 1482.
3.
Gray DJ, Gardner E: Prenatal development of the human knee and superior tibiofibular joints. Am J Anat 1950;86:235–288.
4.
Caffey J (ed): Pediatric X-Ray Diagnosis, ed 7. Chicago, Year Book Medical Publishers, 1978, vol 2, pp 1018–1024.
5.
McLeary RD, Kuhns LR: Sonographic evaluation of the distal femoral epiphyseal ossification center. J Ultrasound Med 1983;2:437–438.
6.
Zilianti M, Fernandez S, Azuaga A, Jorgez J, Severi FM, Colosi E: Ultrasound evaluation of the distal femoral epiphyseal ossification center as a screening test for intrauterine growth retardation. Obstet Gynecol 1987;70:361–364.
7.
Mahony BS, Callen PW, Filly RA: The distal femoral epiphyseal ossification center in the assessment of third-trimester menstrual age: Sonographic identification and measurement. Radiology 1985;155:201–204.
8.
Goldstein I, Lockwood CJ, Reece EA, Hobbins JC: Sonographic assessment of the distal femoral and proximal tibial ossification centers in the prediction of pulmonic maturity in normal women and women with diabetes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1988;159:72–76.
9.
Paesano PL, Vigone MC, Siragusa V, Chiumello G, Del Maschio A, Mora S: Assessment of skeletal maturation in infants: Comparison between two methods in hypothyroid patients. Pediatr Radiol 1998;28:622–626.
10.
Schunk K, Kraus W, Boor R: Sonographic study of Beclard’s nucleus as a method of determining the maturity of the newborn infant (in German). RÖFO Fortschr Geb Röntgenstr Nuklearmed 1987;146:623–627.
11.
Hamack G: Das übertragene, untergewichtige Neugeborne. Monatsschr Kinderheilkd 1960;108:412.
12.
Graf R: The ultrasound examination of the hip; in Tonnis D (ed): Congenital Dysplasia and Dislocation of the Hip. Berlin, Springer, 1987, pp 172–229.
13.
Elgenmark O: The normal development of the ossific centers during infancy and childhood. Acta Paediatr Scand 1946;33(suppl 1):1–79.
14.
Hernandez M, Sanchez E, Sobradillo B, Rincon JM, Narvaiza JL: A new method for assessment of skeletal maturation in the first 2 years of life. Pediatr Radiol 1988;18:484–489.
15.
Harcke HT, Lee MS, Sinning L, Clarke NMP, Borns PF, MacEwen GD: Ossification center of the infant hip: Sonographic and radiographic correlation. AJR 1986;147:317–321.
16.
Erasmie U, Ringertz H: A method for assessment of skeletal maturation in children below one year of age. Pediatr Radiol 1980;9:225–228.
© 2002 S. Karger AG, Basel
2002
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.