{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0260989010989011, 'fraction_numerical': 0.028846153846153848, 'mean_word_length': 4.669260700389105, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A comparison of two techniques of preparing bone marrow aspirate slides.

OBJECTIVE
To compare direct smear technique with ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) preserved smear technique in terms of preparing bone marrow aspirate slides.


METHODS
This prospective study was carried out between September 2009 and July 2012 at the Haematology/Oncology Department, King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. With a standard gauge disposable bone marrow aspirate needle, 0.5 to 1.0 ml bone marrow was aspirated with a 10ml syringe. Half of the marrow was immediately transferred to an EDTA tube with gentle mixing, while slides were prepared directly from the rest of the sample in the syringe. The tube sample was used to prepare slides at the end of the procedure. A score of 1-4 was assigned to each slide depending on the quality and number of particles.


RESULTS
A total of 245 bone marrow aspirate samples were evaluated related to 216 patients. Of the total, 238 (97%) samples were included in the study. The mean score for the direct smear group was 3.40±0.79 and for the EDTA smear group it was 3.34±0.75 (p=0.27), which was not statistically significant. An informal comparison of the morphological analysis of the samples did not reveal any differences.


CONCLUSIONS
Bone marrow aspirate slides prepared at the end of the procedure from EDTA preserved samples were not inferior to slides prepared directly from the aspirated sample.