System Maintenance Notice

Please note that maintenance work is scheduled between 4 AM and 5 AM - CET. During this time, you may experience reduced performance. Thanks for your patience.

Publications

Journal Article Ppublish 2 citations

PubMed: 35468352 DOI: 10.1016/j.anndiagpath.2022.151952

Comparison of bone marrow trephine sample quality between a drill-powered system and a manual needle system.

Ann Diagn Pathol 59:151952

Authors: Sorina-Dana Mihailescu, Pauline Jaselme, Marie-Laure Fontoura, Lamia Feddag-Hannachi, Elena-Liana Veresezan, Fanny Drieux, Vincent Camus, Florian Bouclet, Hervé Tilly, Nathalie Cardinaël, Fabrice Jardin

Affiliations

  • Clinical Research Unit, Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen 76038, France.
  • Department of Clinical Haematology, Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen 76038, France.
  • Department of Pathology, Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen 76038, France.
  • Department of Clinical Haematology, Centre Henri Becquerel, Rouen 76038, France.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Bone marrow biopsy (BMB) is a common procedure in haematology used for the diagnosis and evaluation of response treatment. Because the procedure is difficult for haematologists to perform, patients often experience pain and stress. On Control, a system device, was introduced in the 2000s and uses a drill-powered needle to perform BMB.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the quality of BMB, based on the length of the trephine, the number of interosseous spaces and the interpretability of the examination, obtained from manual BMB vs. drill-powered BMB. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the patient's pain and anxiety, and the haematologist's perceived difficulty in performing BMB.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective study conducted between June 2016 and June 2017 in the Henri Becquerel Cancer Centre in Rouen, France.

RESULTS

A total of 439 patients were included in the study; the sex ratio (M:F) was 1.34 and 70.2% underwent a drill-powered BMB. A significant difference was observed concerning trephine length (14.30 ± 5.58 mm with the drill-powered system vs. 11.18 ± 4.43 mm with manual BMB, p < 0.0001) and the number of interosseous spaces (9.49 ± 5.35 vs. 7.93 ± 4.01, respectively, p = 0.01). The interpretability of the examination did not differ between the two procedures (p = 0.9).

CONCLUSIONS

On Control, the drill-powered system for BMB, is widely distributed in North America and Europe, but this procedure is not yet generally applied. Although this procedure is costly, the ongoing development of this technique, because of its performance, is beneficial especially to obese patients.

MeSH

Bone Marrow, Pain, Needles