ArticleForensic science, medicine, and pathology2025
Effect of hot water maceration, rehydration, and soft tissue presence on 3D geometry of bone.
Article in Forensic science, medicine, and pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Signed in bone: Toolmark identification of a machete and multidisciplinary 3D reconstruction in a homicide investigation.Forensic science international. Synergy · 2026Article
- Forensic maceration - A comparative analysis of literature and practical application.International journal of legal medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn forensic medicine, maceration is often essential for examining bone surfaces, serving purposes such as identifying cut marks, making geometric measurements, and determining the victim's age. While hot water maceration removes soft tissue effectively, it is known to cause bone surface shrinkage. This raises the question of whether this effect is permanent or if it can be partially reversed through rehydration, considering the presence of soft tissue.
methodsComputed tomography (CT) scans were conducted on the radii of 20 paired human anatomic forearm specimens. Subsequently, the radii were extracted, macerated in 60 °C water, CT-scanned in an air environment, rehydrated, re-implanted into the forearms, and CT-scanned again.
resultsMaceration resulted in a mean shrinkage of 0.12 mm on the outer bone surface. This shrinkage was nearly fully recoverable for the diaphysis after rehydration and accounting for soft tissue surrounding the bone. In contrast, the epiphysis showed permanent shrinkage, likely due to the loss of small bone fragments. Analysis of the inner bone surface indicated a smaller effect, but with significant standard deviations, especially for the epiphysis, possibly related to the less well-defined nature of the inner bone surface.
conclusionThe epiphyseal surface of hot water-macerated bone will, on average, be approximately 0.15 mm deflated and cannot retain the original surface. On the other hand, the diaphyseal surface is less affected and can be nearly completely restored after rehydration and accounting for soft tissue surrounding the bone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.