4.1 Article

Digital image analysis of ossification centers in the axial dens and body in the human fetus

Journal

SURGICAL AND RADIOLOGIC ANATOMY
Volume 38, Issue 10, Pages 1195-1203

Publisher

SPRINGER FRANCE
DOI: 10.1007/s00276-016-1679-9

Keywords

Axis vertebra; Odontoid process; Ossification center; Size; Growth dynamics; Human fetus

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The detailed understanding of the anatomy and timing of ossification centers is indispensable in both determining the fetal stage and maturity and for detecting congenital disorders. This study was performed to quantitatively examine the odontoid and body ossification centers in the axis with respect to their linear, planar and volumetric parameters. Using the methods of CT, digital image analysis and statistics, the size of the odontoid and body ossification centers in the axis in 55 spontaneously aborted human fetuses aged 17-30 weeks was studied. With no sex difference, the best fit growth dynamics for odontoid and body ossification centers of the axis were, respectively, as follows: for transverse diameter y = -10.752 + 4.276 x ln(age) +/- A 0.335 and y = -10.578 + 4.265 x ln(age) +/- A 0.338, for sagittal diameter y = -4.329 + 2.010 x ln(age) +/- A 0.182 and y = -3.934 + 1.930 x ln(age) +/- A 0.182, for cross-sectional area y = -7.102 + 0.520 x age +/- A 0.724 and y = -7.002 + 0.521 x age +/- A 0.726, and for volume y = -37.021 + 14.014 x ln(age) +/- A 1.091 and y = -37.425 + 14.197 x ln(age) +/- A 1.109. With no sex differences, the odontoid and body ossification centers of the axis grow logarithmically in transverse and sagittal diameters, and in volume, while proportionately in cross-sectional area. Our specific-age reference data for the odontoid and body ossification centers of the axis may be relevant for determining the fetal stage and maturity and for in utero three-dimensional sonographic detecting segmentation anomalies of the axis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available