[Histonet] microwave processors

[Jeff Birkner]

What Rene has mentioned is true.  However, we have been able to cut our reagent and paraffin usage by 80% which is a huge cost savings.  We have also been able to do away with formalin and xylene, so no more costly monitoring!

Jeff Birkner, CT(ASCP)
Pathology Section Manager
Collaborative Laboratory Services, LLC
1005 Pennsylvania Ave.
Ottumwa, IA  52501
641-684-4621
 

-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Rene J Buesa
Sent: Friday, April 11, 2008 8:55 AM
To: Stephanie Weaver; histonet post
Subject: Re: [Histonet] microwave processors

IF you have a turn around time issue, it is worth considering the MW option, BUT if you are not pressured by the TAT it is NOT worth it.
  Consider the following: NO matter how fast you process your tissues, you will need EXACTLY the same time  PRE and POST processing to take care of your 100 cassettes.
  You probably will cut in half your processing time (since you are aiming at 3 hours processing time), so your total TAT will be about 80% of your present TAT.
  And NO, a modified lab MW oven will not produce the same results.
  If you want I can send you a study I published on the subject.
  René J.

Stephanie Weaver <sweaver <@t> tvmdl.tamu.edu> wrote:
  
 



 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet