Table 12 demonstrating SEE in different studies among different population
Study | Population | Method | Sex | SEE (simple) (cm) | SEE (multiple) (cm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Krishan and Kumar (2007) | North Indian | Percutaneous | Male | 4.41 | – |
Krishan (2008) | North Indian | Percutaneous | Male | 4.136 | – |
Sahni et al. (2010) | Northwest Indian | Percutaneous | 3.56 | 3.569 | |
Male | 2.90 | 2.880 | |||
Acharya et al. (2017) | South India | Direct bone | Female | 4.90 | 4.45 |
Shrestha et al. (2015) | Nepalese | Direct bone | Male | 6.894 | 6.640 |
Female | 5.692 | 5.538 | |||
Pooled | 7.437 | 6.943 | |||
Chiba and Terazawa (1998) | Japanese | Direct bone | Male | 7.09 | 6.96 |
Female | 6.59 | 6.71 | |||
Pooled | 8.14 | 7.95 | |||
Torimitsu et al. (2016) | Japanese | 3D CT bone | Male | 5.581 | 5.406 |
Female | 6.451 | 6.314 | |||
Pooled | 6.918 | 6.394 | |||
Ahmed and Taha (2016) | Sudanese | Percutaneous | Male | 5.698 | 5.532 |
Female | 5.587 | 5.253 | |||
Pooled | – | – | |||
The current study | Egyptian | 3D CT bone | Male | 5.71 | 4.76 |
Female | 6.86 | 6.3 | |||
Pooled | 7.9 | 6.3 |