Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Stem Cell Procurement

Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging after bone marrow harvest – a retrospective study in 50 unrelated marrow donors

Bone Marrow Transplantation volume 35, pages 667–673 (2005)Cite this article

Summary:

A total of 50 unrelated marrow donors were examined by pelvic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to investigate the morphological sequelae of bone marrow harvesting (BMH). Signal increase in T2-weighted sequences and contrast media enhancement in T1 sequences at the operative sites were found as typical MRI morphology 4 weeks after harvest (group A, n=16), corresponding to edema, hyperemia and proliferative activity. Although tissue repair was completed in the majority of donors 1 year after BMH, about 36% of donors in group B (n=16) had abnormal findings. These included a persistence of the ‘acute injury’ signal pattern (2/16, 12%), and signal alterations due to fatty marrow conversion (4/16, 24%). The proportion of MRI abnormalities increased to over 70% in two-time donors (group C, n=11), which might indicate a cumulation of tissue damage after repetitive harvests. If donors had experienced prolonged discomfort after BMH (group D, n=7), MRI revealed pathological signals in 86%. In conclusion, the MRI morphology reflects the pathophysiological reactions after BMH, including inflammation and tissue repair. A further prospective evaluation in a larger number of donors is necessary to confirm these results and to identify the factors which influence the extent and duration of tissue damage.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 4
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bortin MM, Buckner CD . Major complications of marrow harvesting for transplantation. Exp Hematol 1983; 11: 916–921.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Buckner CD, Clift RA, Sanders JE et al. Marrow harvesting from normal donors. Blood 1984; 64: 630–634.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Stroncek DF, Holland PV, Bartch G et al. Experiences of the first 493 unrelated marrow donors in the National Marrow Donor Program. Blood 1993; 81: 1940–1946.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gandini A, Roata C, Franchini M et al. Italian Bone Marrow Donor Registry (IBMDR) Veneto and Trentino-Alto Adige Regional Registry. Unrelated allogeneic bone marrow donation: short- and long-term follow-up of 103 consecutive volunteer donors. Bone Marrow Transplant 2001; 28: 369–374.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Favre G, Beksac M, Bacigalupo A et al. European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT). Differences between graft product and donor side effects following bone marrow or stem cell donation. Bone Marrow Transplant 2003; 32: 873–880.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ordemann R, Hölig K, Wagner K et al. Acceptance and feasibility of peripheral stem cell mobilisation compared to bone marrow collection from healthy unrelated donors. Bone Marrow Transplant 1998; 21 (Suppl 3): S25–S28.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kennedy GA, Morton J, Western R et al. Impact of stem cell donation modality on normal donor quality of life: a prospective randomized study. Bone Marrow Transplant 2003;31: 1033–1035.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Drake PA . Hemorrhage after bone marrow harvest: a case presentation. Clin J Oncol Nurs 2000; 4: 29–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Irving I, Cooper M, Durrant S . Sciatic nerve compression following bone marrow harvest (in process citation). Bone Marrow Transplant 2000; 26: 705–706.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Riley D, Evans TG . Osteomyelitis complicating bone marrow harvest. Clin Infect Dis 1992; 14: 980–981.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Klumpp TR, Mangan KF, MacDonald JS, Mesgarzadeh M . Fracture of the ilium: an unusual complication of bone marrow harvest. Bone Marrow Transplant 1992; 9: 503–504.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tsukayama DT . Pathophysiology of posttraumatic osteomyelitis. Clin Orthop 1999; 360: 22–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gross T, Kaim AH, Regazzoni P, Widmer AF . Current concepts in posttraumatic osteomyelitis with new imaging options. J Trauma 2002; 52: 1210–1219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kaim AH, Gross T, von Schulthess GK . Imaging of chronic posttraumatic osteomyelitis. Eur Radiol 2002; 12: 1193–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kaim A, Ledermann HP, Bongartz G et al. Chronic posttraumatic osteomyelitis of the lower extremity: comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and combined bone scintigraphy/immunoscintigraphy with radiolabelled monoclonal antigranulocyte antibodies. Skeletal Radiol 2000; 29: 378–386.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Deely D, Schweitzer M . MR imaging of bone marrow disorders. Radiol Clin North Am 1997; 35: 193–212.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Vande Berg BC, Malghem J, Lecouvet FE, Maldaque B . Magnetic resonance imaging of normal bone marrow. Eur Radiol 1998; 8: 1327–1334.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ricci C, Cova M, Kang YS et al. Normal age-related patterns of cellular and fatty bone marrow distribution in the axial skeleton: MR imaging study. Radiology 1990; 177: 83–88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Duda SH, Laniado M, Schick F et al. Normal bone marrow in the sacrum of young adults: differences between the sexes seen on chemical-shift MR imaging. Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164: 935–940.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Chang G, McGarigle C, Spitzer TR et al. A comparison of related and unrelated marrow donors. Psychosom Med 1998; 60: 163–167.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Bensinger WI, Martin PJ, Storer B et al. Transplantation of bone marrow as compared with peripheral blood cells from HLA-identical relatives in patients with hematologic cancers. N Engl J Med 2001; 344: 175–181.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Couban S, Simpson DR, Barnett MJ et al, for the Canadian Bone Marrow Transplant Group. A randomized multicenter comparison of bone marrow and peripheral blood in recipients of matched sibling allogeneic transplants for myeloid malignancies. Blood 2002; 100: 1525–1531.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Damiani D, Fanin R, Silvestri F et al. Randomized trial of autologous filgrastim-primed bone marrow transplantation versus filgrastim-mobilized peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in lymphoma patients. Blood 1997; 90: 36–42.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Isola L, Scigliano E, Skerret D et al. A pilot study of allogeneic bone marrow transplantation using related donors stimulated with G-CSF. Bone Marrow Transplant 1997; 20: 1033–1037.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Isola L, Scigliano E, Fruchtman S . Long-term follow-up after allogeneic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor-primed bone marrow transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 2000; 6: 428–433.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rowley SD, Donaldson G, Lilleby K et al. Experiences of donors enrolled in a randomized study of allogeneic bone marrow or peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Blood 2001; 97: 2541–2548 (erratum in: Blood 2001; 98:1301).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was initiated and financially supported by the German Bone Marrow Donor Center (DKMS), Tuebingen, Germany. We thank Catrin Theuser for carefully reading the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1st Medical Department, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    F Kroschinsky, U Schuler & G Ehninger

  2. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany

    T Kittner & M Laniado

  3. German Bone Marrow Donor Center (DKMS), Tuebingen, Germany

    S Mauersberger, U Rautenberg & C Rutt

Authors
  1. F Kroschinsky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T Kittner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S Mauersberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. U Rautenberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. U Schuler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. C Rutt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. M Laniado
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. G Ehninger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to F Kroschinsky.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kroschinsky, F., Kittner, T., Mauersberger, S. et al. Pelvic magnetic resonance imaging after bone marrow harvest – a retrospective study in 50 unrelated marrow donors. Bone Marrow Transplant 35, 667–673 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bmt.1704873

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bmt.1704873

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links