Abstract
Determinations of bone age (BA) in CAH often reveales discrepancies between phalangel (pBA) and carpal BA (cBA). To elucidate this observation we followed the BA of 38 girls and 15 boys with CAH using the methods of Tanner and Whitehouse (Carpal, RUS, TW 20) and of Greulich and Pyle (GP). Bad treatment resulted in significant acceleration of pBA, while cBA correlated well with chronological age (CA). Therefore the method of GP, which does not differentiate between pBA and cBA, has difficulties in determing an exact BA if CAH-children are accelerated. Applying the GP-method to such cases one should look onto pBA rather than onto cBA. It is supposed that the dissociated development of BA is due to the different growth of phalangeal and carpal bones (epiphysial and enchondral ossification).
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
