PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Bone Marrow Examination”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 127 records · Page 7Linked to original sources
PubMedDate not supplied

Bone marrow examination in small cell carcinoma of the bronchus: an unnecessary procedure?

One hundred and thirty-seven patients with small cell carcinoma of the bronchus underwent bone marrow trephine and/or aspirate examination as part of their clinical staging. Twenty-four patients (17.5 per cent) were found to have malignant marrow infiltration. In no case was this an isolated finding of metastatic disease, indeed most patients had gross metastatic spread to liver and/or bone. Marrow infiltration has not been shown to be a major prognostic factor in response to chemotherapy or survival in previous studies. We recommend that this staging procedure be discontinued in routine clinical practice, and instead be confined to specific indications in clinical trials.

Bone Marrow Examination↗
PubMed1988

The value of bone marrow examination for tumor staging in breast cancer.

The purpose of our study was to investigate the value of cytokeratin antibodies for identifying bone marrow involvement in breast cancer patients who showed no evidence of distant metastases using noninvasive tumor staging procedures. Bone marrow for histological (biopsy) and immunocytochemical (aspiration) evaluation was obtained from the anterior iliac crest from 50 unselected consecutive women during surgical treatment of the primary tumor. The histological examination was done on nondecalcified bone sections. The immunocytochemical studies were carried out on interface smears of the bone marrow aspirates. For staining, cytokeratin antibodies (PKK 1) and the immune alkaline phosphatase method was used. Cytokeratin-positive cells were found in 4 of the 50 cases (8%). Of those 4 patients, however, 2 also showed evidence of neoplastic bone marrow infiltration histologically. We thus were able to prove that immunocytochemistry on aspirates is superior to conventional histology in identifying tumor in bone marrow. Nonetheless, our results clearly fell below the rate found in previous studies where epithelial membrane antigen antibodies were used.

Bone Marrow↗
PubMed2002

Diagnostic utility of bilateral bone marrow examination: significance of morphologic and ancillary technique study in malignancy.

BACKGROUND: To retrospectively evaluate the significance of morphologic examination and ancillary studies performed on bilateral bone marrow biopsy specimens, 1864 bone marrow samples were studied. METHODS: Bilateral bone marrow biopsy specimens included 883 specimens that were evaluated for involvement by non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL); 381 specimens that were evaluated for involvement by carcinoma (CA); 362 specimens that were evaluated for involvement by Hodgkin disease (HD); 94 specimens that were evaluated for involvement by sarcoma (SA); 56 specimens that were evaluated for involvement by multiple myeloma (MM); 53 specimens that were evaluated for involvement by acute and chronic leukemia, myelodysplasia, and/or myeloproliferative disorders (LEUK); and 35 specimens that were evaluated for other reasons. RESULTS: Of all 1864 specimens, 410 samples (22.0%) were positive for disease, including 77% of MM samples, 58% of LEUK samples, 29.6% of NHL samples, 14% of SA samples, 9.9% of HD samples, and 6.8% of CA samples. A discrepancy between the left and right sides was identified in 48 specimens (11.7% of positive samples). The discrepancy rate was 39% for HD samples, 29% for SA samples, 23% for CA samples, and 9.2% for NHL samples. No morphologic discrepancies between bilateral samples were found in MM samples or LEUK samples. Bilateral flow cytometric studies (n = 113 samples) were positive in 11 samples (9.7%; all morphologically positive), with two discrepancies detected between bilateral samples. Bilateral cytogenetic studies (n = 74 samples) were positive in 5 samples (7%), and there were no discrepancies. Bilateral molecular studies (n = 16 samples) were positive in 7 samples (44%), and there were 3 discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral morphologic evaluation is useful in the evaluation of patients with NHL, HD, CA, and SA and is not indicated for patients with acute or chronic leukemia, myelodysplasia, MM, and other diseases. Bilateral flow cytometric or cytogenetic studies of bone marrow did not provide additional information in this population to justify bilateral samples. The role of bilateral molecular analysis needs to be defined further, but pooled samples for molecular studies may be adequate.

Biopsy↗