1999International Journal of Paediatric DentistryRequires access

The relationship between bone age, chronological age and dental age in children with isolated growth hormone deficiency

Encarnación Vallejo-Bolaños, Antonio España‐López, Antonio Muñoz‐Hoyos, José Manuel Fernández‐García

Open publisher page 25 citations

Abstract

AIM: To relate dental age and bone age to chronological age in a group of children with isolated growth hormone deficiency (GHD). DESIGN: A group of 25 children between the ages of 6 and 18 years, diagnosed as having GHD were studied. Of these, 16 were male and nine were female, undergoing replacement therapy with growth hormone (GH) over 2.5 years. Dental age (DA) was estimated from orthopantograms (Haavicko Methods) and compared to bone age (BA) by Greulich and Pyle Standards, and chronological age (CA). RESULTS: CA versus BA--there was a statistically significant difference of 1.52 years between the average chronological age and bone age (t = 5.61, P < 0.001). CA versus DA--there was a statistically significant difference of 0.92 years between the average chronological age and dental age (t = 3.93, P < 0.001). BA versus DA--statistically nonsignificant differences were found between the average bone age and dental age (t = -0.60, P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: After 2.5 years of therapy with growth hormone both DA and BA showed a significant delay compared to CA. Despite the fact that some catch-up occurs in speed of growth there is no evidence from the children in our study that might support the occurrence of a similar speed-up in dental age.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

AIM: To relate dental age and bone age to chronological age in a group of children with isolated growth hormone deficiency (GHD). DESIGN: A group of 25 children between the ages of 6 and 18 years, diagnosed as having GHD were studied. Of these, 16 were male and nine were female, undergoing replacement therapy with growth hormone (GH) over 2.5 years. Dental age (DA) was estimated from orthopantograms (Haavicko Methods) and compared to bone age (BA) by Greulich and Pyle Standards, and chronological age (CA). RESULTS: CA versus BA--there was a statistically significant difference of 1.52 years between the average chronological age and bone age (t = 5.61, P < 0.001). CA versus DA--there was a statistically significant difference of 0.92 years between the average chronological age and dental age (t = 3.93, P < 0.001). BA versus DA--statistically nonsignificant differences were found between the average bone age and dental age (t = -0.60, P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: After 2.5 years of therapy with growth hormone both DA and BA showed a significant delay compared to CA. Despite the fact that some catch-up occurs in speed of growth there is no evidence from the children in our study that might support the occurrence of a similar speed-up in dental age.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 25 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

AIM: To relate dental age and bone age to chronological age in a group of children with isolated growth hormone deficiency (GHD). DESIGN: A group of 25 children between the ages of 6 and 18 years, diagnosed as having GHD were studied. Of these, 16 were male and nine were female, undergoing replacement therapy with growth hormone (GH) over 2.5 years. Dental age (DA) was estimated from orthopantograms (Haavicko Methods) and compared to bone age (BA) by Greulich and Pyle Standards, and chronological age (CA). RESULTS: CA versus BA--there was a statistically significant difference of 1.52 years between the average chronological age and bone age (t = 5.61, P < 0.001). CA versus DA--there was a statistically significant difference of 0.92 years between the average chronological age and dental age (t = 3.93, P < 0.001). BA versus DA--statistically nonsignificant differences were found between the average bone age and dental age (t = -0.60, P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: After 2.5 years of therapy with growth hormone both DA and BA showed a significant delay compared to CA. Despite the fact that some catch-up occurs in speed of growth there is no evidence from the children in our study that might support the occurrence of a similar speed-up in dental age.

Key concepts: Medicine, Bone age, Growth hormone deficiency, Growth hormone, Pediatrics, Physiology, Hormone, Dentistry

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The relationship between bone age, chronological age and dental age in children with isolated growth hormone deficiency — Research Paper | ScholarLens