MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adequacy of Bone Marrow Trephine Biopsy in a Tertiary Care Center

2008· article· en· W2556398862 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emily Rimmer, Donald S. Houston, Kristine Roland

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematological disorders and diagnostics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBone marrowTrephineBiopsyBone marrow examinationTertiary careSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract OBJECTIVES: To review the bone marrow trephine biopsies analyzed at the Health Sciences Centre in Winnipeg, Canada in 2007 and evaluate them in terms of published criteria for adequacy. METHODS: The Health Sciences Centre (HSC) is the largest tertiary care centre in the province of Manitoba, and houses the only leukemia treatment/bone marrow transplant ward. It also provides pathology services to the adjacent clinics of the provincial cancer agency. One thousand and twelve (1012) bone marrow aspirates and biopsies were identified from January 1 – December 31, 2007 through pathology records. Bone marrow biopsies performed on children (age <18 years) and specimens referred from other centers were excluded. A total of 770 bone marrow aspirates and biopsies were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria and 67 were unavailable for evaluation. 703 biopsies were included in the final analysis. Data was collected on location of procedure (HSC ward vs. outpatient cancer clinic), operator and indication of biopsy. The total length of each biopsy and length of interpretable bone marrow were measured. The bone marrow biopsies were compared to published criteria for adequacy: 16 mm total length prior to processing (11 mm after processing), and 8 mm of interpretable marrow after processing. RESULTS: Using 8 mm of interpretable marrow as the criterion of adequacy, the overall adequacy rate was 67% (472/703). There was a significant difference in the percentage of adequate biopsies between operators. Hematologists obtained an adequacy rate of 81% (220/272), Registered Clinical Assistants (RCA) 63% (169/268), oncologists 56% (5/9), residents 50% (71/141), and medical students 54% (7/13), p<0.001). The mean overall length of biopsy after processing was 14.5 mm (SD 5.3 mm), with 10 mm (SD 5.4 mm) of interpretable bone marrow. Hematologists obtained samples with a mean length of interpretable bone marrow of 12.4 mm (SD 5.8 mm), RCA 8.6 mm (SD 3.9 mm), oncologists 10 mm (SD 4.1 mm), residents 8.4 mm (SD 5.7 mm), and medical students 8.2 mm (SD 4.5 mm). There is a significant difference in length of core biopsies obtained by different operators. Hematologists get longer biopsies than residents (p≪0.01), RCA (p≪0.01) and medical students (p<0.05). When looking specifically at those cases (n = 294) in which the requisition submitted at the time of the procedure stated an indication for which an adequate biopsy is crucial (detection of infiltration, diagnosis and staging of lymphoma) or when there was an inadequate/dry aspirate (n = 74), there was no significant difference in percentage of adequate biopsies when compared to the overall adequacy rate (70% vs. 67%, p=NS). When the biopsy was performed at the outpatient cancer clinic, the adequacy rate was 72.5% (342/472), whereas biopsies performed on HSC wards had an adequacy rate of 56.4% (133/236). CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of bone marrow biopsies performed during the study period were of inadequate size. There was a significant difference in quality of bone marrow biopsies obtained by different operators, and among biopsies performed at different locations. The proportion of adequate samples was no better in cases where the aspirate was dry or where the suspected diagnosis should have mandated collection of an adequate sample. A multidimensional intervention including education and procedural changes will be implemented in order to improve the quality of bone marrow biopsies performed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.259

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHematological disorders and diagnosticsFrench-language works237,207