Farah Moid1, Louis DePalma. 1. Department of Pathology, George Washington University Hospital, Washington, DC 20037, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Bone marrow aspirates as well as bone marrow trephine biopsies are frequently performed to assess whether there is marrow involvement by a malignancy. Numerous reports differ in the relative value of these 2 procedures and fail to provide concise guidelines that can help choose the appropriate technique in this clinical situation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative value of aspirates and trephine biopsies in the diagnosis of solid tumor metastasis and Hodgkin lymphoma. In addition, we correlate our findings with those of the literature to provide a concise practice guideline. DESIGN: Sixty-six cases showing bone marrow involvement by solid tumor and Hodgkin lymphoma in bone marrow aspirates, bone marrow trephine biopsies, or both were included in the study. The diagnosis and findings made on aspirates were compared with those made on trephine biopsies in each case. RESULTS: In those cases where both aspirate and trephine biopsy were available for evaluation, there was a 22% positive correlation in the findings on aspirates and trephine biopsies. The correlation between aspirates and trephine biopsies was highest in cases of small cell carcinoma of the lung (3/11, or 36.3%) followed by breast carcinoma (7/20, or 35%), prostate carcinoma (1/9, or 11.1%), and Hodgkin lymphoma (1/20, or 5%). Two of 5 cases from the miscellaneous category demonstrated simultaneous involvement of aspirate and trephine biopsy by a gastric carcinoma as well as an adrenal gland carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Bone marrow aspirate and bone marrow trephine biopsy should both be performed in patients with proven or suspected malignancies where staging may affect management. However, bone marrow aspirate has only a minimal role, if any, in detecting bone marrow involvement by Hodgkin lymphoma. In cases of breast carcinoma, small cell carcinoma of lung, and prostate carcinoma, aspirate evaluation may confirm trephine biopsy results or, more rarely, provide the sole confirmation of the malignancy.
CONTEXT: Bone marrow aspirates as well as bone marrow trephine biopsies are frequently performed to assess whether there is marrow involvement by a malignancy. Numerous reports differ in the relative value of these 2 procedures and fail to provide concise guidelines that can help choose the appropriate technique in this clinical situation. OBJECTIVE: To compare the relative value of aspirates and trephine biopsies in the diagnosis of solid tumor metastasis and Hodgkin lymphoma. In addition, we correlate our findings with those of the literature to provide a concise practice guideline. DESIGN: Sixty-six cases showing bone marrow involvement by solid tumor and Hodgkin lymphoma in bone marrow aspirates, bone marrow trephine biopsies, or both were included in the study. The diagnosis and findings made on aspirates were compared with those made on trephine biopsies in each case. RESULTS: In those cases where both aspirate and trephine biopsy were available for evaluation, there was a 22% positive correlation in the findings on aspirates and trephine biopsies. The correlation between aspirates and trephine biopsies was highest in cases of small cell carcinoma of the lung (3/11, or 36.3%) followed by breast carcinoma (7/20, or 35%), prostate carcinoma (1/9, or 11.1%), and Hodgkin lymphoma (1/20, or 5%). Two of 5 cases from the miscellaneous category demonstrated simultaneous involvement of aspirate and trephine biopsy by a gastric carcinoma as well as an adrenal gland carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Bone marrow aspirate and bone marrow trephine biopsy should both be performed in patients with proven or suspected malignancies where staging may affect management. However, bone marrow aspirate has only a minimal role, if any, in detecting bone marrow involvement by Hodgkin lymphoma. In cases of breast carcinoma, small cell carcinoma of lung, and prostate carcinoma, aspirate evaluation may confirm trephine biopsy results or, more rarely, provide the sole confirmation of the malignancy.
Authors: Roger S Riley; David Williams; Micaela Ross; Shawn Zhao; Alden Chesney; Bradly D Clark; Jonathan M Ben-Ezra Journal: J Clin Lab Anal Date: 2009 Impact factor: 2.352
Authors: Jeremiah R Long; J Derek Stensby; Elizabeth L Wiesner; Wesley N Bryson; Travis J Hillen; Jack W Jennings Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Mihai Merzianu; Adrienne Groman; Alan Hutson; Claudiu Cotta; Russell K Brynes; Attilio Orazi; Vishnu Reddy; Julie Teruya-Feldstein; Ramila Amre; Manjula Balasubramanian; Guilherme Brandao; Sindhu Cherian; Elizabeth Courville; David Czuchlewski; Guang Fan; David Grier; Daniela Hoehn; Kedar V Inamdar; Ridas Juskevicius; Prabhjot Kaur; John Lazarchick; Michael R Lewis; Rodney R Miles; Jerome B Myers; Michel R Nasr; Hina N Qureishi; Horatiu Olteanu; Valentin G Robu; Gratian Salaru; Neerja Vajpayee; Jeffrey Vos; Ling Zhang; Shanxiang Zhang; Le Aye; Elisa Brega; James E Coad; John Grantham; Sinisa Ivelja; Robert McKenna; Kieran Sultan; Gregory Wilding; Robert Hutchison; LoAnn Peterson; Richard T Cheney Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 2.493