ArticleSkeletal radiology2020
CT-guided bone marrow aspirations and biopsies: retrospective study and comparison with blind procedures.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Self-supervised learning can distinguish myelodysplastic neoplasms from clinical mimics using bone marrow biopsies.Blood neoplasia · 2026Article
- Percutaneous CT-Guided Bone Biopsies: Indications, Feasibility and Diagnostic Yield in the Different Skeletal Sites-From the Skull to the Toe.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Standardizing Clinical Workflow for Assessing Minimal Residual Disease by Flow Cytometry in Multiple Myeloma.Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2023Article
- Omission of Planning CT Reduces Patient Radiation Exposure during CT-Guided Bone Marrow Biopsy and Aspiration.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2021Article
- Highlights of the annual scientific meeting of the Society of Skeletal Radiology (SSR) 2019, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA.Skeletal radiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the pathology results of CT-guided and blind bone marrow aspirations and biopsies.
methodsNinety-eight consecutive CT-guided biopsies and 98 age- and gender-matched blind (non-CT-guided) posterior iliac crest bone marrow aspirations and biopsies performed in 2017 were reviewed for adequacy of core biopsies and aspirate smears. CT procedure images and CT abdomen/pelvis images were reviewed to evaluate anatomic features of the posterior ilium and soft tissues. Statistical analysis was performed using a T test, Fisher exact test, and Kruskal-Wallis test.
resultsThere was no significant difference in the age and gender of the two groups (p > 0.05). However, the CT-guided group had a higher BMI (p = 0.0049) and posterior soft tissue thickness (p = 0.0016). More CT-guided biopsy samples (CT 93 (95%); blind 77 (79%); p = 0.0006) and aspirate smears (CT 90 (92%); blind 78 (80%); p = 0.042) were categorized as adequate. The CT-guided group had longer core lengths (CT 1.4 ± 0.6 (range 0.3-3.5) cm; blind 1.0 ± 0.60 (range 0-2.6) cm; p = 0.0001). Overall, 131/164 (80%) of the cases had at least one of the described features (slanted posterior ilium (angle > 30°), 30%; rounded posterior ilium, 20%; thick posterior ilium cortex, 13%; focal lesion in posterior ilium, 12%; prior procedure in posterior ilium, 5%; posterior soft tissue thickness > 3 cm, 40%).
conclusionCT-guided bone marrow procedures were more likely to result in both adequate aspirate smears and biopsy samples and longer core lengths when compared with blind procedures.
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.