Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy and safety of bone marrow aspiration and biopsy using fluoroscopic guidance and a drill-powered needle: clinical experience from 775 cases

  • Musculoskeletal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of performing a fluoroscopically guided bone marrow aspiration and biopsy (BMAB) using a drill-powered needle in a large patient population.

Methods

This retrospective study received institutional review board approval with a waiver of patient informed consent. We identified all BMAB procedures from August 2012 through December 2016 performed at our institution using fluoroscopic guidance and a drill-powered needle. Clinical diagnosis, patient age, patient gender, biopsy site, biopsy needle gauge, bone marrow aspirate volume, bone marrow core biopsy length, patient platelet count, conscious sedation details, complications, and diagnostic adequacy were investigated for each case and summarized.

Results

A total of 775 BMAB procedures were performed and analyzed. These were performed in 436 female patients and 339 male patients ranging in age between 16 and 91 years (average age of 53 years). Samples obtained from the procedures in our series were diagnostic in 95.0% of cases. The complication rate for our series was 0.3%.

Conclusions

The use of fluoroscopic guidance and a drill-powered needle for bone marrow aspiration and biopsy is a safe and efficacious procedure.

Key Points

• Fluoroscopy can be utilized for imaging guidance during bone marrow aspiration and biopsy.

• The use of fluoroscopic guidance and a drill-powered needle for bone marrow aspiration and biopsy has a high diagnostic yield.

• The procedure has an excellent patient safety profile.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

BMAB:

Bone marrow aspiration and biopsy

CT:

Computed tomography

References

  1. Bain BJ (2001) Bone marrow aspiration. J Clin Pathol 54:657–663

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bain BJ (2001) Bone marrow trephine biopsy. J Clin Pathol 54:737–742

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Moid F, DePalma L (2005) Comparison of relative value of bone marrow aspirates and bone marrow trephine biopsies in the diagnosis of solid tumor metastasis and Hodgkin lymphoma: institutional experience and literature review. Arch Pathol Lab Med 129(4):497

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Subramanian R, Basu D, Badhe B, Dutta TK (2007) Role of bone marrow trephine biopsy in the diagnosis of marrow involvement in Hodgkin’s disease. Indian J Pathol Microbiol 50(3):640

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Hamid GA, Hanibala N (2009) Comparison of bone marrow aspiration and bone marrow biopsy in neoplastic disease. Gulf J Oncol (6):41–44

  6. Joshi R, Horncastle D, Elderfield K, Lampert I, Rahemtulla A, Naresh KN (2008) Bone marrow trephine combined with immunohistochemistry is superior to bone marrow aspirate in follow-up of myeloma patients. J Clin Pathol 61(2):213–216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee SH, Erber WN, Porwit A, Tomonaga M, Peterson LC (2008) ICSH guidelines for the standardization of bone marrow specimens and reports. Int J Lab Hematol 30(5):349–364

  8. Kaur M, Singh Rana AP, Kapoor S, Puri A (2014) Diagnostic value of bone marrow aspiration and biopsy in routine hematology practice. J Clin Diagn Res 8(8):FC13–FC16. https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2014/9823.4760

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Islam A (1991) A new sternal puncture needle. J Clin Pathol 44(8):690–691

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Islam A (2007) Bone marrow aspiration before bone marrow core biopsy using the same bone marrow biopsy needle: a good or bad practice? J Clin Pathol 60(2):212–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Konda B, Pathak S, Edwin I et al (2014) Safe and successful bone marrow biopsy: an anatomical and CT-based cadaver study. Am J Hematol 89(10):943–946

  12. Bain BJ (2003) Bone marrow biopsy morbidity and mortality. Br J Heamatol 121(6):949–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bain BJ (2006) Morbidity associated with bone marrow aspiration and trephine biopsy - a review of UK data for 2004. Haematologica 91(9):1293–1294

  14. Chu F, Tes D, Chan T, Kwong YL (2018) Arterial injury during bone marrow aspiration: embolization through the biopsy needle. J Vasc Interv Radiol 29(4):584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Friedlis MF, Centeno CJ (2016) Performing a better bone marrow aspiration. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 27(4):919–939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Huang TY, Huang JT, Yam LT, Postel GC, Abaskaron M (1999) Computed tomography guidance in bone marrow aspiration for diagnosis of marrow necrosis and metastasis. J Ky Med Assoc 97(7):299–302

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pfeifer C, Ternes T, St Clari S, Palko W, Dakhil C (2015) Bone marrow aspiration under CT guidance: technique and value. Oncology (Williston Park) 29(4 Suppl 1):205144

  18. Jain S, Enzerra M, Mehta RS, Smith R, Djokic M (2017) Bone marrow biopsies performed by both the powered OnControl drill device and the Jamshidi needle produce adequate specimens. J Clin Pathol 70(6):541–543

  19. Schnapauff D, Marnitz T Freyhardt P et al (2013) CT guided bone biopsy using a battery powered intraosseous device. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 36(5):1405–1410

  20. Appel NB, Gilula LA (2001) “Bull’s-eye” modification for transpedicular biopsy and vertebroplasty. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177(6):1387–1389

  21. Badiola C, Scappaticci F, Brahaj D (2012) CT guided bone marrow aspiration and core biopsy. Open J Radiol 2(2):55–56. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojrad.2012.22010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Vadlamudi V and Sterling K (2017) Fluoroscopically guided powered bone marrow biopsy in interventional radiology: a safe and efficacious procedure. Poster presented at: 42nd Annual Scientific Meeting of Society of Interventional Radiology; 2017; Washington, DC

  23. Ellis LD, Jensen WN, Westerman MP (1964) Needle biopsy of bone and marrow; an experience with 1,445 biopsies. Arch Intern Med 114:213–221

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Roth J, Newman E (2002) Gluteal compartment syndrome and sciatica after bone marrow biopsy: a case report and review of the literature. Am Surg 68(9):791–794

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Berber I, Erkurt M, Kuku I et al (2014) An unexpected complication of bone marrow aspiration and trephine biopsy: arteriovenous fistula. Med Princ Pract 23(4):380–383

  26. Khakwani M, Srinath S, Pratt G, Moss P (2019) A rare complication of bone marrow aspiration and trephine biopsy: staphylococcus aureus osteomyelitis and septicaemia. Br J Haematol 184(1):7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Engeset A, Nesheim A, Sokolowski J (1979) Incidence of ‘dry tap’ on bone marrow aspirations in lymphomas and carcinomas. Diagnostic value of the small material in the needle. Scand J Hematol 22(5):417–422

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Harris NL, Jaffe ES, Pileri SA, Stein H (2008) World Health Organization classification of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues, 4th edn. International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon

    Google Scholar 

  29. Dietrich T, Peterson C, Zeimpekis K et al (2019) Fluoroscopy-guided versus CT-guided lumbar steroid injections: comparison of radiation exposure and outcomes. Radiology 290(3):752–759

  30. Maino P, Presilla S, Colli Franzone PA, van Kuijk SMJ, Perez RSGM, Koetsier E (2018) Radiation dose exposure for lumbar transforaminal epidural steroid injections and facet joint blocks under CT vs. fluoroscopic guidance. Pain Pract 18(6):798–804

Download references

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Mayo Clinic Arizona, 5777 East Mayo Boulevard, Phoenix, AZ, 85054, USA

    Jeremiah R. Long

  2. University of Missouri, One Hospital Drive, Columbia, MO, 65212, USA

    J. Derek Stensby

  3. Mallinckrodt Institute of Radiology, Washington University in St. Louis, 510 South Kingshighway Boulevard, St. Louis, MO, 63110, USA

    Elizabeth L. Wiesner, Wesley N. Bryson, Travis J. Hillen & Jack W. Jennings

Authors
  1. Jeremiah R. Long
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Derek Stensby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Elizabeth L. Wiesner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Wesley N. Bryson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Travis J. Hillen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jack W. Jennings
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeremiah R. Long.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Jeremiah R. Long, MD.

Conflict of interest

Travis J. Hillen, MD, is a consultant for Medtronic, SI Bone, ERT, and Ultragenyx and Jack W. Jennings, MD, PhD is a consultant for Bard.

Statistics and biometry

No complex statistical methods were necessary for this paper.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Study subjects or cohorts overlap

The data from this manuscript was previously reported as a scientific abstract at the Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) 2019 Annual Meeting in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Methodology

• Retrospective

• Observational

• Performed at one institution

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Long, J.R., Stensby, J.D., Wiesner, E.L. et al. Efficacy and safety of bone marrow aspiration and biopsy using fluoroscopic guidance and a drill-powered needle: clinical experience from 775 cases. Eur Radiol 30, 5964–5970 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06987-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-020-06987-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation