[Histonet] Tissue-Tek Xpress x50

[Bartlett, Jeanine (CDC/CCID/NCZVED)]

Of course each instrument has its pros and cons....I thought I was clear that I have not used the Pathos and was simply describing my use of the Xpress.  As proper grossing technique is important with any type or brand of tissue processing, using the grossing tools Sakura sells would be useful for anyone grossing, period.  We all know the "garbage in-garbage out" situation with improperly grossed tissues.
 
Also, you are not limited to 1.5 mm......it can be increased if you adjust the processing time.  Not to 5 mm, but it can be thicker.
 
I am not sure I understand the statement you made regarding the Xpress being limited regarding less cassettes.
 
But of course each lab should investigate whatever product suits their needs the best.

________________________________

From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu on behalf of Rene J Buesa
Sent: Tue 6/24/2008 10:59 AM
To: Bartlett, Jeanine (CDC/CCID/NCZVED); Suriana Bte Abdul Latiff; kimtournear <@t> yahoo.com; Histonet
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Tissue-Tek Xpress x50



Jeanine:
  All you have pointed out about the Xpress is true BUT you have to have THIN (1.5 mm) tissue slices to obtain optimal results and breast specimens have to be previously fixed (cannot be placed into the Xpress immediately after resection).
  The Pathos, on the other hand, can handle specimens up to 5 mm thick which sometimes happens when somebody doing grossing is not paying attention to detail.
  Besides, Xpress can handle less cassettes / basket full, another aspect not limited by the Pathos.
  Which means that each instruments has its own strong and weak points and all boils down to personal preferences of the user, and needs of the institution.
  René J.

"Bartlett, Jeanine (CDC/CCID/NCZVED)" <jqb7 <@t> cdc.gov> wrote:
       




      
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet