ArticleAnnals of hematology2012
Microscopic examination of bone marrow aspirates in malignant disorders of haematopoiesis--a comparison of two slide preparation techniques.
Article in Annals of hematology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Application Value of Flow Cytometry-Based Peripheral Blood Leukocyte Classification in Screening for Acute Leukemia and Posttreatment Monitoring.Journal of clinical laboratory analysis · 2026Article
- Relapse surveillance of acute myeloid leukemia patients in first remission after consolidation chemotherapy: diagnostic value of regular bone marrow aspirations.Annals of hematology · 2022Article
- A Comparative Study of Bone Marrow Squash and Wedge Aspiration Smears.Indian journal of hematology & blood transfusion : an official journal of Indian Society of Hematology and Blood Transfusion · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It is mandatory to perform microscopic examinations of bone marrow aspirates during the diagnosis of many neoplastic haematopoiesis disorders. In 2008, The International Committee for Standardization in Hematology recommended the use of two types of slides for the microscopic evaluation of bone marrow: wedge-spread film and crush film slides. Because these techniques have not yet been compared, we performed such a comparison. Routine bone marrow samples from 250 patients diagnosed due to different neoplastic haematological disorders were evaluated. The major differences between the two compared techniques were identified in 13 patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, seven patients with systemic mastocytosis and 11 patients with acute leukaemias or myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia. Differences were noted also in many patients with multiple myeloma, but the clinical significance of these discrepancies was rather modest. The major causes of the differences observed seemed to be the dilution of marrow with blood cells and the focal growth of many neoplastic cells. We believe that the crush technique is more advantageous compared to the wedge-spread films. Therefore, we recommend the use of crush films as the primary method for establishing a diagnosis or for making therapeutic decisions based on the microscopic examination of bone marrow.
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.