Background: Nutritional anemia particularly iron deficiency anemia comprise a major public health problem in India. Precise diagnosis is necessary for the correct treatment as the multiple coexisting morbid chronic inflammatory conditions seen in these cases gives erroneous biochemical results. Microscopic assessment of bone marrow iron is considered to be the the gold standard. However, the conventional Gale's method cannot differentiate between the iron deficient cases and functional iron deficiency. This is made possible by the newer intensive method of iron assessment in the present study. Aim: To compare the assessment of iron status by Gale's and Intensive method on bone marrow aspirate smears in cases of anemia. Materials and Methods: A prospective study of 117 cases of all age groups and both sexes, having haemoglobin < 10mg/dl were included in the study. Bone marrow aspiration was done and iron assessment was done by both the Gale's and Intensive method. Serum ferritin was also done in 23 out of 117 cases to serve as a control. However, it was not a part of the study. Results: Gale's method revealed hypoferrimic state in 29.1% cases and normal iron stores in 70.9% cases. Iron deficient status was further reduced to 6.83% cases by the intensive method of iron assessment. Maximum number of cases had functional iron deficiency by the intensive method.
Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is one of the main leading causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide, caused by the complete occlusion of a coronary artery with thrombus. [1] Intervention with thrombolytic agents in AMI is an effective means of limiting myocardial damage. [2] Several thrombolytic agents currently being used differ with respect to fibrin affinity, fibrin specificity, method of administration (bolus vs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.