SpringerLink
Log in

A Review of Core Biopsies in Musculoskeletal Oncology

  • Review Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Biopsy as a procedure is technically simple but conceptually a challenge. The principles of biopsy have remained more or less the same for 3 decades. With the advent of imaging, hospital facilities, and pathology modalities, we feel it is important that these principles are revisited. Uncertainties are spread across the literature regarding this very important first step in the care of an oncology patient. A surgeon planning the biopsy should be equipped with an MRI for planning. A biopsy has to be considered even for a benign-looking lesion. Even though literature is not clear on what kind of biopsy a surgeon should undertake, it is, without doubt, core biopsy has the edge that fine needle biopsies fail to reproduce. Image guidance for a biopsy is paramount for the accuracy of the sample. Pre-biopsy embolization has to be an option in the toolbox of a surgeon. Biopsy samples from an open biopsy or expensive or difficult interventional radiologist-assisted biopsy should undergo a rapid assessment to reduce the error of sample collection and thereby avoid subjecting the patient to a repeat procedure. Even though clean procedures do not require antibiotic prophylaxis, in view of major endoprosthetic implantations in the future, antibiotic use may be justified. An appropriate biopsy set and methodology as per institution experience are described in the paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Thailand)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kasraeian S, Allison DC, Ahlmann ER, Fedenko AN, Menendez LR (2010) A comparison of fine-needle aspiration, core biopsy, and surgical biopsy in the diagnosis of extremity soft tissue masses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(11):2992–3002

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Errani C, Traina F, Perna F, Calamelli C, Faldini C (2013) Current concepts in the biopsy of musculoskeletal tumors. Sci World J. 2013:538152

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Brestoff JR, Toland A, Afaneh K, Qavi AJ, Press B, Westervelt P, Kreisel F, Hassan A (2019) Bone marrow biopsy needle type affects core biopsy specimen length and quality and aspirate hemodilution. Am J Clin Pathol 151(2):185–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/aqy126 Erratum in: Am J Clin Pathol. 2019 Jan 7;151(2):240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mankin HJ, Lange TA, Spanier SS (1982) The hazards of biopsy in patients with malignant primary bone and soft tissue tumors. J Bone Joint Surg 64A:1121–1127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rougraff BT, Kneisl JS, Simon MA (1993) Skeletal metastases of unknown origin: a prospective study of a diagnostic strategy. J Bone Joint Surg 75:1276

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jaffe HL (1959) Tumors and tumorous conditions of the bones and joints. J Med Educ 34(1):72

  7. Liu PT, Valadez SD, Chivers FS, Roberts CC, Beauchamp CP (2007) Anatomically based guidelines for core needle biopsy of bone tumors: implications for limb-sparing surgery. RadioGraphics 27(1):189–205. https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.271065092

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Abeysekera WYM, Punchihewa GL (2015) Biopsy principles of musculoskeletal tumours — when, where, who and how? Sri Lanka Journal of Surgery 33:20. https://doi.org/10.4038/sljs.v33i2.8147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Le HB, Lee ST, Munk PL (2010) Image-guided musculoskeletal biopsies. Seminars in Interventional Radiology 27(2):191–198

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Bickels J, Jelinek JS, Shmookler BM, Neff RS, Malawer M (2004) Biopsy of musculoskeletal tumors. In: Current concepts. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48407-2_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Kilpatrick SE, Ward WG, Chauvenet AR et al (1998) The role of fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the initial diagnosis of pediatric bone and soft tissue tumors: an institutional experience. Mod Pathol 11(10):923

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kaffenberger BH, Wakely PE Jr, Mayerson JL (2010) Local recurrence rate of fine-needle aspiration biopsy in primary high-grade sarcomas. J SurgOncol 101(7):618–621

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schwartz HS, Spengler DM (1997) Needle tract recurrences after closed biopsy for sarcomas: three cases and review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol 4:228–236

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chambers M, O’Hern K, Kerr DA (2020) Fine-needle aspiration biopsy for the diagnosis of bone and soft tissue lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Soc Cytopathol 9(5):429–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasc.2020.05.012

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Kubo T, Furuta T, Johan MP, Sakuda T, Ochi M, Adachi N (2018) A meta-analysis supports core needle biopsy by radiologists for better histological diagnosis in soft tissue and bone sarcomas. Medicine. 97:e11567

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ng VY, Thomas K, Crist M, Wakely PE Jr, Mayerson J (2010) Fine needle aspiration for clinical triage of extremity soft tissue masses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(4):1120–1128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. vonMehren M, Randall RL, Benjamin RS et al (2018) Soft tissue sarcoma, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 16:536–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liu JC, Chiou HJ, Chen WM et al (2004) Sonographically guided core needle biopsy of soft tissue neoplasms. J Clin Ultrasound 32(6):294–298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yu GH, Maisel J, Frank R, Pukenas BA, Sebro R, Weber K (2017) Diagnostic utility of fine-needle aspiration cytology of lesions involving bone. Diagn Cytopathol 45:608e613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Satturwar S, Rekhtman N, Lin O, Pantanowitz L (2020) An update on touch preparations of small biopsies. Journal of the American Society of. Cytopathology 9(5):322–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasc.2020.04.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Toki S, Sone M, Yoshida A, Nishisho T, Gokita T, Kobayashi E, Nakatani F, Chuman H, Sugawara S, Arai Y, Kawai A (2022) Image-guided core needle biopsy for musculoskeletal lesions. J Orthop Sci 27(2):448–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2020.12.017

  22. Park SH, Bang SM, Nam E, Cho EK, Shin DB, Lee JH, Ahn JY (2008) A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study of low-dose intravenous Lorazepam to reduce procedural pain during bone marrow aspiration and biopsy. Pain Med 9(2):249–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Desmeules JA (2000) Review The tramadol option. Eur J Pain 4(Suppl A):15–21

    Google Scholar 

  24. Scott LJ, Perry CM (2000) Review Tramadol: a review of its use in perioperative pain. Drugs 60(1):139–176

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Chakupurakal G, Delgado J, Nikolousis E, Pitchapillai S, Allotey D, Holder K, Bratby L, de la Rue J, Milligan DW (2008) Midazolam in conjunction with local anaesthesia is superior to Entonox in providing pain relief during bone marrow aspirate and trephine biopsy. J Clin Pathol 61(9):1051–1054

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Friedman AG, Mulhern RK, Fairclough D et al (1991) Midazolam premedication for pediatric bone marrow aspiration and lumbar puncture. Med Pediatr Oncol 19(6):499–504. https://doi.org/10.1002/mpo.2950190610

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Milligan DW, Howard MR, Judd A (1987) Premedication with lorazepam before bone marrow biopsy. J Clin Pathol 40(6):696–698

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Dunlop TJ, Deen C, Lind S, Voyle RJ, Prichard JG (1999) Use of combined oral narcotic and benzodiazepine for control of pain associated with bone marrow examination. South Med J 92(5):477–480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Giannoutsos I, Grech H, Maboreke T, Morgenstern G (2004) Performing bone marrow biopsies with or without sedation: a comparison. Clin Lab Haematol 26(3):201–204

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Kanagasundaram SA, Lane LJ, Cavalletto BP, Keneally JP, Cooper MG (2001) Efficacy and safety of nitrous oxide in alleviating pain and anxiety during painful procedures. Arch Dis Child 84(6):492–495

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Johnson H, Burke D, Plews C, Newell R, Parapia L (2008) Improving the patient’s experience of a bone marrow biopsy — an RCT. J Clin Nurs 17(6):717–252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Annequin D, Carbajal R, Chauvin P, Gall O, Tourniaire B, Murat I (2000) Fixed 50% nitrous oxide oxygen mixture for painful procedures: a French survey. Pediatrics 105(4):E47

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Kuball J, Schüz J, Gamm H, Weber M (2004) Bone marrow punctures and pain. Acute Pain 6(1):9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acpain.2004.02.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Exner GU, Kurrer MO, Mamisch-Saupe N, Cannon SR (2017) The tactics and technique of musculoskeletal biopsy. EFORT Open Rev 2(2):51–57. https://doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.2.160065

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Wang Z, Feng D, Wei W (2021) Impact of music on anxiety and pain control during extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine 100(4):e23684. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000023684

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Brown L, Chen ET, Binder DS (2020) The use of virtual reality for Peri-procedural pain and anxiety at an outpatient spine clinic injection visit: an exploratory controlled randomized trial. Am J Transl Res 12(9):5818–5826

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Jamshidi K, Swaim WR (1971) Bone marrow biopsy with unaltered architecture: a new biopsy device. J Lab Clin Med 77:335–342

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Issakov J, Flusser G, Kollender Y, Merimsky O, Lifschitz-Mercer B, Meller I (2003) Computed tomography-guided core needle biopsy for bone and soft tissue tumors. Isr Med Assoc J 5(1):28–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Islam A (2019) The solid core (trephine) bone marrow biopsy needle; Advantages of employing a biopsy needle with core retention design. Biomed J Sci Tech Res18(4):13799–13803

  40. McDermott VG, Schuster MG, Smith T (1997) Antibiotic prophylaxis in vascular and interventional radiology. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:31–38

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bickels J, Jelinek JS, Shmookler BM, Neff RS, Malawer MM (1999) Biopsy of musculoskeletal tumors. Current concepts. Clin Orthop Relat Res 368:212–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Clark CR, Morgan C, Sonstegard DA, Matthews LS (1977) The effect of biopsy-hole shape and size on bone strength. J Bone Joint Surg Am 59(2):213–217

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Chu JP, Chen W, Li JP, Zhuang WQ, Huang YH, Huang ZM, Yang JY (2007) Clinicopathologic features and results of transcatheter arterial chemoembolization for osteosarcoma. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 30:201–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedic Oncology Department, HCG Hospital, Bangalore, India

    Amar Kamat, Anto Anand Gopurathingal, Pramod Chinder & Suraj Hindiskere

Authors
  1. Amar Kamat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anto Anand Gopurathingal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pramod Chinder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Suraj Hindiskere
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amar Kamat.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kamat, A., Gopurathingal, A.A., Chinder, P. et al. A Review of Core Biopsies in Musculoskeletal Oncology. Indian J Surg Oncol 15 (Suppl 1), 52–61 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-023-01788-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193-023-01788-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation