[Histonet] Microwwave Processing: Fixation vs Standardization

[Amos Brooks]

Greg,
     I would like to hear of your experiences with this as well. I am seeing
an ugly situation brewing on the horizon with fixation and standardization.
With the introduction of certain tests that are directly related to
diagnosis and treatment such as FISH and Herceptest as well as other tests
that are highly standardized we are going to have to be very conscious of
fixation and it's affect on the end results of the test.
     My opinion is that it would be preferred to have a standard fixation
and I truly do not care which one it is as long as it is standardized.
Maintaining multiple procedures seems to be not only labor intensive but
could be nearly impossible due in part to the fact that multiple procedures
would require multiple controls. Some controls are very difficult to find
such as Varicella Virus, Alk-1 or even HSV sometimes to name a few. I really
see so many problems with this that I can't see any way around it and it is
something that we will all end up having to deal with eventually since these
tests are quickly becoming standard and who's to say which tests are going
to be needed prior to processing.
Thanks,
Amos Brooks



Message: 16
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 14:28:17 -0800
From: "Luck, Greg D." <LuckG <@t> empirehealth.org>
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Microwave processing
To: 'John PJ Coleman' <jcolclefa <@t> aol.com>,
       histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
       <EDAC013F7055E1438FF70C30C43A4BE206821876 <@t> exchange05.inhs.org>
Content-Type: text/plain

John,
Your concerns are very valid particularly in your role as a reference lab.
A couple of questions.  1st, which part of "FFPE" does the Sakura instrument
not fulfill (e.g. are the tissues not exposed to NBF during the Sakura
processing cycle).  2nd, When you perform IHC in the role as a reference lab
how are you currently ascertaining how the paraffin blocks you receive for
IHC have been processed?  In a somewhat analogous situation for years we
maintained two IHC protocols because we did histology for two hospitals.
One hospital used NBF as its designated routine fixative and the other used
"Prefer".  Was somewhat of a pain but was manageable, however we only
average about 50-60 IHC's/day.  I could share some of what we learned
developing and maintaining two standing IHC protocols for each antibody if
you think our situation has any potential learning value for you.  Good
luck, Greg
Greg Luck, BS, HT(ASCP)
Anatomic Pathology Supervisor
Deaconess Medical Center
800 W. 5th Ave
Spokane, WA 99204
Phone 509.473.7077
Fax 509.473.7133
luckg <@t> empirehealth.org
www.deaconessmedicalcenter.org