[Histonet] RE: Histonet Digest, Vol 81, Issue 33
Pathology Staff
pathstaff <@t> brhealthsystem.org
Thu Aug 26 09:09:36 CDT 2010
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu]On Behalf Of
histonet-request <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 12:33 PM
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Histonet Digest, Vol 81, Issue 33
Send Histonet mailing list submissions to
histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
histonet-request <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
You can reach the person managing the list at
histonet-owner <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Histonet digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. I will be out of office beginning the afternoon of 8/23 and
returning 8/31 4 2010 and returning 8/13/2010 (Marilyn.A.Weiss <@t> kp.org)
2. preparation of frozen sections (Tench, Bill)
3. Re: Alcian Yellow (Robert Richmond)
4. PMS2 (DianaRip1 <@t> aol.com)
5. Technovit 9100 New (C B)
6. RE: preparation of frozen sections (gayle callis)
7. Re: Technovit 9100 New (Jack Ratliff)
8. Re: Technovit 9100 New (Jack Ratliff)
9. Re: shrinkage (louise renton)
10. Re: PMS2 (Dana Settembre)
11. porcine CD31 FFPE (C B)
12. Lectin From Arachis hypogaea(peanut)- peroxidase Staining
(Chakib Boussahmain)
13. RE: Ventana vs Leica (Houston, Ronald)
14. shrinkage/a howlong is a piece of string type question
(Edwards, Richard E.)
15. RE: Ventana vs Leica (Maria Katleba)
16. Testing for shrinkage RE: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong is a
piece of string type question (gayle callis)
17. Re: Testing for shrinkage RE: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong
is a piece of string type question
(Jan.Minshew <@t> leica-microsystems.com)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:02:43 -0700
From: Marilyn.A.Weiss <@t> kp.org
Subject: [Histonet] I will be out of office beginning the afternoon of
8/23 and returning 8/31 4 2010 and returning 8/13/2010
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
<OFFA37BC14.1BCA8F4F-ON88257789.007E97A5-88257789.007E97A5 <@t> kp.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
I will be out of the office starting 08/23/2010 and will not return until
08/31/2010.
In my absence please ask for Mary Campbell . If this is urgent or you need
to speak to me directly you can contact me on my cell phone number
858-472-4266.
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 16:07:09 -0700
From: "Tench, Bill" <Bill.Tench <@t> pph.org>
Subject: [Histonet] preparation of frozen sections
To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID: <2820431BF953BB4DA3E9E1A5882265FD034A554F <@t> MAIL1.pph.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
So as a pathologist, i have to ask you why you would want to air dry a
section? From a diagnostic perspective, we consider air dried samples
unacceptable in my lab. All of our standard histologic interpretation
is based on fixed sections. So, why not drop the slide in a jar or ETOH
and keep it there until you are ready to stain?
Bill Tench
Associate Dir. Laboratory Services
Chief, Cytology Services
Palomar Medical Center
555 E. Valley Parkway
Escondido, California 92025
Bill.Tench <@t> pph.org
Voice: 760- 739-3037
Fax: 760-739-2604
[None] made the following annotations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidential E-Mail: This e-mail is intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone
other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail, and destroy the
original message and all copies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 20:31:40 -0400
From: Robert Richmond <rsrichmond <@t> gmail.com>
Subject: [Histonet] Re: Alcian Yellow
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikms4On2O+w=-qsKaBD=uzA9jGSkdkiBiT2VFzY <@t> mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Jennifer Johnson asks:
>>Can I get someone to share their source for Alcian Yellow? Our Pathologist
wants to try a different method for Helicobacter and I need powdered AY?
I'd suggest you look into Anatech's method, which bypasses Alcian
yellow. (I have no connection with Anatech.)
Bob Richmond
Samurai Pathologist
Knoxville TN
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 20:47:31 EDT
From: DianaRip1 <@t> aol.com
Subject: [Histonet] PMS2
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID: <da1eb.423c70fe.39a5c223 <@t> aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Can anyone share their protocol for PMS2? I just keep getting background
staining.
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 17:57:55 -0700 (PDT)
From: C B <clb1158 <@t> yahoo.com>
Subject: [Histonet] Technovit 9100 New
To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID: <715563.69133.qm <@t> web114017.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Anyone using Technovit 9100 for microtome and/or ground sections? Do you
use
the routine Plus slides for mounting microtome sections or do the sections
require another type of adhesive? When staining the ground sections, do
you
have any problems with certain solutions causing cracking/crazing?
Cindy Baranowski, HT (ASCP)
Saint Joseph's Translational Research Institute
Atlanta, Ga
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 19:26:38 -0600
From: "gayle callis" <gayle.callis <@t> bresnan.net>
Subject: RE: [Histonet] preparation of frozen sections
To: "'Tench, Bill'" <Bill.Tench <@t> pph.org>,
<Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <000701cb43f4$92678490$b7368db0$@callis <@t> bresnan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
I can understand your question from the clinical point of view where you
want to cut the section, fix, stain and then examine for immediate
diagnosis. Not everyone does this.
There are many of us, both in clinical and research, who do frozen sections
for other than diagnostic reasons. We often need to do immunofluorescent or
enzyme immunohistochemical staining (chromogenic) for antigens e.g. CD4, CD8
and many others that will not withstand the kind of fixation you describe.
Often we need to do cold acetone fixation or some other solvent fixation for
this purpose.
In that case, our histologic interpretation is based on a different handling
and fixation of a fresh tissue frozen section, and in our case, we cannot
just cut and immerse into alcohol.
One, the fixative e.g. alcohol is not going to work for our antigen
Two, we perform cryomicrotomy on a piece of tissue, collecting as many as a
hundred sections, often serial and store the sections until staining
(immunostaining in particular) can be performed.
Air drying is a form of fixation, and the act of picking up a section onto a
slide has been referred to as "flash drying". The antigens we need to see
are better when air dried overnight, then fixed with either acetone or
acetone/alcohol (in the case, for murine CD markers). Often air drying the
section at RT and then fixing with acetone, and storing these fixed sections
in a -80C freezer is very acceptable.
If I were in a clinical setting and doing a routine H&E, I probably would do
exactly as you do now. It is a matter of application. In our case,
immersion immediately into a fixative is not optimal for our
immunofluorescent or enzyme immunohistochemical results. If we want to see
or identify where we are in a sample, we do exactly as you do, section and
immerse into fixative, and then do a rapid H&E stain when we can or within a
few minutes. We frequently immerse a frozen section into neutral buffered
formalin and fix later in the day, week or whenever to have excellent
morphology and staining results with an H&E.
I hope this clarifies some parameters of performing cryotomy and staining
versus how you do it.
Gayle M. Callis
HTL/HT/MTA(ASCP)
Bozeman MT
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Tench, Bill
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 5:07 PM
To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] preparation of frozen sections
So as a pathologist, i have to ask you why you would want to air dry a
section? From a diagnostic perspective, we consider air dried samples
unacceptable in my lab. All of our standard histologic interpretation
is based on fixed sections. So, why not drop the slide in a jar or ETOH
and keep it there until you are ready to stain?
Bill Tench
Associate Dir. Laboratory Services
Chief, Cytology Services
Palomar Medical Center
555 E. Valley Parkway
Escondido, California 92025
Bill.Tench <@t> pph.org
Voice: 760- 739-3037
Fax: 760-739-2604
[None] made the following annotations
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidential E-Mail: This e-mail is intended only for the person or entity
to which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Dissemination,
distribution, or copying of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone
other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail, and destroy the
original message and all copies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
------------------------------
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:36:53 -0500
From: Jack Ratliff <ratliffjack <@t> hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Technovit 9100 New
To: C B <clb1158 <@t> yahoo.com>
Cc: "Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
<Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP199C7E04D6A1DA171320130AE840 <@t> phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cindy,
I have very little experience with the Technovit kits as I predominantly use
a MMA + DBP + Perkadox formulation for both thin and thick section
histology. However, in my experience with the Technovit kits, I have
discovered for me that the MMA + DBP + Perkadox type of formulation is more
consistent, reproducible and overall more flexible for all types of
microtomy applications and also for the variety of species (mouse to human)
of bone tissue. I have more control over the quality of resin block I can
produce with an MMA + DBP + Perkadox formulation, thin sections can be
deplastified and staining is more routine and flexible.
As for mounting thin microtomed sections, you need to coat your slides with
some type of adhesive so that your sections will stay mounted throughout
staining. I use Haupt's adhesive to coat my glass slides, along with an
aluminum slide press and oven to activate the Haupt's media and complement
the adhesion process. There is a step by step process that I can share with
you if interested to help accomplish the section adhesion.
Now with regards to cracking/crazing of ground (thick) sections in the
presence of certain stains. I believe the best way to describe this is that
these experiences are proportional to the density or hardness of the resin.
If you have a hard resin section (based upon the overall hardness of you
resin block), some chemicals will act to make the section brittle and crack
similar to prolonged use of xylenes with undeminerized bone processing or
prolonged paraffin infiltration is a soft tissue application.
Jack
On Aug 24, 2010, at 7:57 PM, C B <clb1158 <@t> yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anyone using Technovit 9100 for microtome and/or ground sections? Do you
use
> the routine Plus slides for mounting microtome sections or do the sections
> require another type of adhesive? When staining the ground sections, do
you
> have any problems with certain solutions causing cracking/crazing?
> Cindy Baranowski, HT (ASCP)
> Saint Joseph's Translational Research Institute
> Atlanta, Ga
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
>
------------------------------
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 21:48:15 -0500
From: Jack Ratliff <ratliffjack <@t> hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Technovit 9100 New
To: C B <clb1158 <@t> yahoo.com>
Cc: "Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
<Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP38BE6A384EF891D7C8C3DDAE840 <@t> phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
One more thing I might add is that Dorn and Hart Microedge has just released
a MMA + DBP + Perkadox kit (Acrylosin) in both a "hard" (ground/thick
section formulation) and "soft" (thin section formulation). They are also in
the process of carrying a lot of the stains that work well with this type of
resin formulation as well as everything in between to assist in resin
histology (i.e. slide presses, Haupt's, microtomy supplies/kits, etc). If
you haven't already done so, just do an Internet search of their name and
you should easily reach their website to view their current products.
Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any additional questions.
Jack
On Aug 24, 2010, at 7:57 PM, C B <clb1158 <@t> yahoo.com> wrote:
> Anyone using Technovit 9100 for microtome and/or ground sections? Do you
use
> the routine Plus slides for mounting microtome sections or do the sections
> require another type of adhesive? When staining the ground sections, do
you
> have any problems with certain solutions causing cracking/crazing?
> Cindy Baranowski, HT (ASCP)
> Saint Joseph's Translational Research Institute
> Atlanta, Ga
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
>
------------------------------
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:51:18 +0200
From: louise renton <louise.renton <@t> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Histonet] shrinkage
To: "Edwards, Richard E." <ree3 <@t> leicester.ac.uk>,
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
<AANLkTikn0xktfOt8ygYXCY37tP1Kus=dtKTPJY9fzFmP <@t> mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
I seem to remember a good discussion in this in the following book:. L. P.
Kok and M. E. Boon. *Microwave Cookbook for Microscopists*, Coulomb Press
Leyden, Leiden (1992) p. 1432 .
Whetehr or not it is still available is another matter
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 5:17 PM, Edwards, Richard E.
<ree3 <@t> leicester.ac.uk>wrote:
>
> Anybody aware of the degree of shrinkage in paraffin processed tissues
> and/or GMA processed tissues?, many thanks.
>
> Cheers
> Richard Edwards
>
> Leicester University.
>
> Leicester U.K.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
>
--
Louise Renton
Bone Research Unit
University of the Witwatersrand
Johannesburg
South Africa
+27 11 717 2298 (tel & fax)
073 5574456 (emergencies only)
"There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls".
George Carlin
No trees were killed in the sending of this message.
However, many electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
------------------------------
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 06:12:36 -0400
From: "Dana Settembre" <settembr <@t> umdnj.edu>
Subject: Re: [Histonet] PMS2
To: <DianaRip1 <@t> aol.com>,<histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <sc74b45d.054 <@t> smtpnpc.umdnj.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Diane,
When I was doing PMS2 I was using BD's mouse antibody @ 1:10
Retreived with Dako's TRS in a steamer for 40 min,
incubated the antibody for 60 minutes
and I used a labelled polymer for the detection (Dako's Envision +
Mouse)
It was difficult to work up.
Good Luck,
Dana Settembre, HT ASCP
Immunohistochemistry Lab
UMDNJ - University Hospital
Newark, NJ USA
>>> <DianaRip1 <@t> aol.com> 08/24/10 8:47 PM >>>
Can anyone share their protocol for PMS2? I just keep getting
background
staining.
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
------------------------------
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 06:38:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: C B <clb1158 <@t> yahoo.com>
Subject: [Histonet] porcine CD31 FFPE
To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID: <459879.15305.qm <@t> web114004.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Has anyone used the Serotec # MCA 1746G mouse anti-porcine CD31 or #MCA 1747
mouse anti-porcine CD31 on FFPE porcine arteries? If so, can you give
recommendations for retrieval and dilutions? The website shows they have
"Not
determined" reactivity.
Thanks in advance for any recommendations.
Cindy Baranowski, HT(ASCP)
------------------------------
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 06:42:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chakib Boussahmain <chak_bou <@t> yahoo.com>
Subject: [Histonet] Lectin From Arachis hypogaea(peanut)- peroxidase
Staining
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID: <67839.6324.qm <@t> web58105.mail.re3.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Hi Histonet,
I am trying to do some staining using Lectin from Arachis
hypogaea(peanut)-Peroxidase( FROM SIGMA), and wondering if anyone uses that
stain if so, could you please share the protocol with me?
Your help will be much appreciated!
Thank you
Chakib
HTL From MIT
------------------------------
Message: 13
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:45:48 -0400
From: "Houston, Ronald" <Ronald.Houston <@t> nationwidechildrens.org>
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
To: "'Rathborne, Toni'" <trathborne <@t> somerset-healthcare.com>, Pamela
Marcum <mucram11 <@t> comcast.net>, Maria Katleba <Maria.Katleba <@t> stjoe.org>
Cc: histonet <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>,
"BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org" <BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org>,
"histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
<histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID:
<E02E1309B208F94C83B968E45781001A23405724BF <@t> NCHEXMBX01.columbuschildrens.ne
t>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Bond III hands down; I know Ventana are cutting pricing drastically to get
machines in to labs, but the Bond is much more user friendly, especially if
you use concentrated antibodies, and also employs the same detection kit for
ISH as it does for IHC
Ronnie Houston
Anatomic Pathology Manager
Nationwide Children's Hospital
Columbus OH 43205
(614) 722 5450
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Rathborne,
Toni
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 5:10 PM
To: Pamela Marcum; Maria Katleba
Cc: histonet; BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org;
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
We recently acquired the Bond III. It was a tough decision, but space was
the main reason we went with Leica. The Ventana sales team that visited our
lab was very eager to get the account. Their pricing was not much different.
They even offered to credit us for additional waste disposal.
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu]On Behalf Of Pamela
Marcum
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 3:48 PM
To: Maria Katleba
Cc: histonet; BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org;
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
I totally agree and we have an Ultra, 2 XTs and 3 Benchmarks. They are good
systems that need to get cheaper and more flexible. I am demoing the Bond
III and love the ease of use, flexibility and cost savings, most. Maria is
right it is about 40% less to run than a Ventana.
Pam Marcum
AP Manager
UAMS
Little Rock, AR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maria Katleba" <Maria.Katleba <@t> stjoe.org>
To: BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org, "Jay Lundgren" <jaylundgren <@t> gmail.com>
Cc: "histonet" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>,
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:32:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Hi Jay,
I have the Ventana Benchmark XT...love it......BUT Leica is LESS
EXPENSIVE!!!
Reasons to buy Leica Bond:
1. Does IHC and ISH (yes- so does the Ventana)
2. Continuous feed (Ventana does NOT offer this!!!!)
3. Space saver, much smaller footprint than Benchmark
4. No wasted antibodies...
5. Not forced to buy EXPENSIVE prep kits either....
6. Cost to run with reagents is about 40% less than Ventana- Yes! I
did my own cost analysis
7. Won't blow tissue off the slide!
8. No where near the waste that Benchmark has!!!
I went to the Leica Symposium in San Francisco last week. I was able to ask
many grueling questions... They did a very good job of honestly addressing
each one.
Honestly, if I was asked right now to buy...it would be Leica!
Regards,
Maria
Maria Katleba MS HT(ASCP)
Pathology Dept. Mgr
Queen of the Valley Medical Center
1000 Trancas Street
Napa CA 94558
(707) 252-4411 x3689 direct
(707) 226-4385 pager
(707) 294-9229 cell- anytime
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of
BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 12:05 PM
To: Jay Lundgren
Cc: histonet; histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Jay,
I currently use the Ventana and am very pleased with the results I get.
The only draw back is the cost to run the instrument. It can get quite
pricey. They added space on the antibody wheel but took space away from the
slide area. This has impacted our work flow greatly. We are however looking
to purchase a second one. This one will have continual through put. That
should help out with TAT. Hope this helps.
Beatrice Sullivan, HT(A.S.C.P.) HTL , AAS, CLSP(N.C.A.)
AP Supervisor
Shore Memorial Hospital
609-653-3590
Jay Lundgren
<jaylundgren <@t> gmai
l.com> To
Sent by: histonet
histonet-bounces@ <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
lists.utsouthwest cc
ern.edu
Subject
[Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
08/24/2010 02:30
PM
I was wondering if anyone out there had experience with both the
Ventana Ultra and the Leica Bond immunostainers. I realize that most
people
have a personal preference as to brands, but I'm not looking for a
knee-jerk
opinion (LEICA RULZ!!!!11 or VENTANA FTW!!), just someone who has had
actual
experience working on a daily basis with both instruments. If this is you,
could you please tell me which you preferred and why.
I'm currently working for a facility in MT which has narrowed down its
search to these two instruments. No vendors please, they've already given
their pitches.
Thanks,
Jay A.
Lundgren M.S., HTL (ASCP)
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
________________________________
Notice from St. Joseph Health System:
Please note that the information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure.
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maria Katleba" <Maria.Katleba <@t> stjoe.org>
To: BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org, "Jay Lundgren" <jaylundgren <@t> gmail.com>
Cc: "histonet" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>,
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:32:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Hi Jay,
I have the Ventana Benchmark XT...love it......BUT Leica is LESS
EXPENSIVE!!!
Reasons to buy Leica Bond:
1. Does IHC and ISH (yes- so does the Ventana)
2. Continuous feed (Ventana does NOT offer this!!!!)
3. Space saver, much smaller footprint than Benchmark
4. No wasted antibodies...
5. Not forced to buy EXPENSIVE prep kits either....
6. Cost to run with reagents is about 40% less than Ventana- Yes! I
did my own cost analysis
7. Won't blow tissue off the slide!
8. No where near the waste that Benchmark has!!!
I went to the Leica Symposium in San Francisco last week. I was able to ask
many grueling questions... They did a very good job of honestly addressing
each one.
Honestly, if I was asked right now to buy...it would be Leica!
Regards,
Maria
Maria Katleba MS HT(ASCP)
Pathology Dept. Mgr
Queen of the Valley Medical Center
1000 Trancas Street
Napa CA 94558
(707) 252-4411 x3689 direct
(707) 226-4385 pager
(707) 294-9229 cell- anytime
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of
BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 12:05 PM
To: Jay Lundgren
Cc: histonet; histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Jay,
I currently use the Ventana and am very pleased with the results I get.
The only draw back is the cost to run the instrument. It can get quite
pricey. They added space on the antibody wheel but took space away from the
slide area. This has impacted our work flow greatly. We are however looking
to purchase a second one. This one will have continual through put. That
should help out with TAT. Hope this helps.
Beatrice Sullivan, HT(A.S.C.P.) HTL , AAS, CLSP(N.C.A.)
AP Supervisor
Shore Memorial Hospital
609-653-3590
Jay Lundgren
<jaylundgren <@t> gmai
l.com> To
Sent by: histonet
histonet-bounces@ <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
lists.utsouthwest cc
ern.edu
Subject
[Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
08/24/2010 02:30
PM
I was wondering if anyone out there had experience with both the
Ventana Ultra and the Leica Bond immunostainers. I realize that most
people
have a personal preference as to brands, but I'm not looking for a
knee-jerk
opinion (LEICA RULZ!!!!11 or VENTANA FTW!!), just someone who has had
actual
experience working on a daily basis with both instruments. If this is you,
could you please tell me which you preferred and why.
I'm currently working for a facility in MT which has narrowed down its
search to these two instruments. No vendors please, they've already given
their pitches.
Thanks,
Jay A.
Lundgren M.S., HTL (ASCP)
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
________________________________
Notice from St. Joseph Health System:
Please note that the information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure.
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and any included attachments are from Somerset Medical Center
and are intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this
message is confidential and may contain privileged, confidential,
proprietary and/or trade secret information entitled to protection and/or
exemption from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please
promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error
by e-mail or you may call Somerset Medical Center's computer Help Desk
at 908-685-2200, ext. 4050.
Be sure to visit Somerset Medical Center's Web site -
www.somersetmedicalcenter.com - for the most up-to-date news,
event listings, health information and more.
----------------------------------------- Confidentiality Notice:
The following mail message, including any attachments, is for the
sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential
and privileged information. The recipient is responsible to
maintain the confidentiality of this information and to use the
information only for authorized purposes. If you are not the
intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the
intended recipient), you are hereby notified that any review, use,
disclosure, distribution, copying, printing, or action taken in
reliance on the contents of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original
message. Thank you.
------------------------------
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 14:49:55 +0100
From: "Edwards, Richard E." <ree3 <@t> leicester.ac.uk>
Subject: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong is a piece of string type
question
To: "histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
<histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID:
<7722595275A4DD4FA225B92CDBF174A1E8D777B9E9 <@t> EXC-MBX3.cfs.le.ac.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Many thanks to all who responded, for paraffin processed tissues the
figures suggested for the amount of shrinkage found or expected were :-
"more than 5%":"5-10%":"10%"(twice):"10-15%":"20%":"25%":"30-35%":"30-40%",
one responder felt it was "noticeable" and another thought it was a "fairy
tale" concocted by pathologists............unsurprisingly many responders
thought that the degree of shrinkage was dependent on the fixative used,
processing schedule and the nature of the tissue itself, e.g. amount of
lipid present. As far as shrinkage with GMA processed tissue go, a single
response of "5%" was quoted.
Richard Edwards
------------------------------
Message: 15
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 08:57:19 -0700
From: Maria Katleba <Maria.Katleba <@t> stjoe.org>
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
To: "Rathborne, Toni" <trathborne <@t> somerset-healthcare.com>, Pamela
Marcum <mucram11 <@t> comcast.net>
Cc: histonet <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>,
"BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org" <BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org>,
"histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu"
<histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID:
<BF297E3B9FA5A14F8A14AF49FD1A56171762E6EA8E <@t> SJSNT-SCMAIL03.stjoe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Toni brings up a very good point.... you know it's pretty bad when a company
is willing to pay your waste costs... Not a good business plan. Why not
'fix' the machine so that it's more "green"
Maria Katleba MS HT(ASCP)
-----Original Message-----
From: Rathborne, Toni [mailto:trathborne <@t> somerset-healthcare.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:10 PM
To: Pamela Marcum; Maria Katleba
Cc: histonet; BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org;
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
We recently acquired the Bond III. It was a tough decision, but space was
the main reason we went with Leica. The Ventana sales team that visited our
lab was very eager to get the account. Their pricing was not much different.
They even offered to credit us for additional waste disposal.
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu]On Behalf Of Pamela
Marcum
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 3:48 PM
To: Maria Katleba
Cc: histonet; BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org;
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
I totally agree and we have an Ultra, 2 XTs and 3 Benchmarks. They are good
systems that need to get cheaper and more flexible. I am demoing the Bond
III and love the ease of use, flexibility and cost savings, most. Maria is
right it is about 40% less to run than a Ventana.
Pam Marcum
AP Manager
UAMS
Little Rock, AR
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maria Katleba" <Maria.Katleba <@t> stjoe.org>
To: BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org, "Jay Lundgren" <jaylundgren <@t> gmail.com>
Cc: "histonet" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>,
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:32:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Hi Jay,
I have the Ventana Benchmark XT...love it......BUT Leica is LESS
EXPENSIVE!!!
Reasons to buy Leica Bond:
1. Does IHC and ISH (yes- so does the Ventana)
2. Continuous feed (Ventana does NOT offer this!!!!)
3. Space saver, much smaller footprint than Benchmark
4. No wasted antibodies...
5. Not forced to buy EXPENSIVE prep kits either....
6. Cost to run with reagents is about 40% less than Ventana- Yes! I
did my own cost analysis
7. Won't blow tissue off the slide!
8. No where near the waste that Benchmark has!!!
I went to the Leica Symposium in San Francisco last week. I was able to ask
many grueling questions... They did a very good job of honestly addressing
each one.
Honestly, if I was asked right now to buy...it would be Leica!
Regards,
Maria
Maria Katleba MS HT(ASCP)
Pathology Dept. Mgr
Queen of the Valley Medical Center
1000 Trancas Street
Napa CA 94558
(707) 252-4411 x3689 direct
(707) 226-4385 pager
(707) 294-9229 cell- anytime
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of
BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 12:05 PM
To: Jay Lundgren
Cc: histonet; histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Jay,
I currently use the Ventana and am very pleased with the results I get.
The only draw back is the cost to run the instrument. It can get quite
pricey. They added space on the antibody wheel but took space away from the
slide area. This has impacted our work flow greatly. We are however looking
to purchase a second one. This one will have continual through put. That
should help out with TAT. Hope this helps.
Beatrice Sullivan, HT(A.S.C.P.) HTL , AAS, CLSP(N.C.A.)
AP Supervisor
Shore Memorial Hospital
609-653-3590
Jay Lundgren
<jaylundgren <@t> gmai
l.com> To
Sent by: histonet
histonet-bounces@ <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
lists.utsouthwest cc
ern.edu
Subject
[Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
08/24/2010 02:30
PM
I was wondering if anyone out there had experience with both the
Ventana Ultra and the Leica Bond immunostainers. I realize that most
people
have a personal preference as to brands, but I'm not looking for a
knee-jerk
opinion (LEICA RULZ!!!!11 or VENTANA FTW!!), just someone who has had
actual
experience working on a daily basis with both instruments. If this is you,
could you please tell me which you preferred and why.
I'm currently working for a facility in MT which has narrowed down its
search to these two instruments. No vendors please, they've already given
their pitches.
Thanks,
Jay A.
Lundgren M.S., HTL (ASCP)
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
________________________________
Notice from St. Joseph Health System:
Please note that the information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure.
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maria Katleba" <Maria.Katleba <@t> stjoe.org>
To: BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org, "Jay Lundgren" <jaylundgren <@t> gmail.com>
Cc: "histonet" <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>,
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 2:32:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Hi Jay,
I have the Ventana Benchmark XT...love it......BUT Leica is LESS
EXPENSIVE!!!
Reasons to buy Leica Bond:
1. Does IHC and ISH (yes- so does the Ventana)
2. Continuous feed (Ventana does NOT offer this!!!!)
3. Space saver, much smaller footprint than Benchmark
4. No wasted antibodies...
5. Not forced to buy EXPENSIVE prep kits either....
6. Cost to run with reagents is about 40% less than Ventana- Yes! I
did my own cost analysis
7. Won't blow tissue off the slide!
8. No where near the waste that Benchmark has!!!
I went to the Leica Symposium in San Francisco last week. I was able to ask
many grueling questions... They did a very good job of honestly addressing
each one.
Honestly, if I was asked right now to buy...it would be Leica!
Regards,
Maria
Maria Katleba MS HT(ASCP)
Pathology Dept. Mgr
Queen of the Valley Medical Center
1000 Trancas Street
Napa CA 94558
(707) 252-4411 x3689 direct
(707) 226-4385 pager
(707) 294-9229 cell- anytime
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of
BSullivan <@t> shorememorial.org
Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2010 12:05 PM
To: Jay Lundgren
Cc: histonet; histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: Re: [Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
Jay,
I currently use the Ventana and am very pleased with the results I get.
The only draw back is the cost to run the instrument. It can get quite
pricey. They added space on the antibody wheel but took space away from the
slide area. This has impacted our work flow greatly. We are however looking
to purchase a second one. This one will have continual through put. That
should help out with TAT. Hope this helps.
Beatrice Sullivan, HT(A.S.C.P.) HTL , AAS, CLSP(N.C.A.)
AP Supervisor
Shore Memorial Hospital
609-653-3590
Jay Lundgren
<jaylundgren <@t> gmai
l.com> To
Sent by: histonet
histonet-bounces@ <histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
lists.utsouthwest cc
ern.edu
Subject
[Histonet] Ventana vs Leica
08/24/2010 02:30
PM
I was wondering if anyone out there had experience with both the
Ventana Ultra and the Leica Bond immunostainers. I realize that most
people
have a personal preference as to brands, but I'm not looking for a
knee-jerk
opinion (LEICA RULZ!!!!11 or VENTANA FTW!!), just someone who has had
actual
experience working on a daily basis with both instruments. If this is you,
could you please tell me which you preferred and why.
I'm currently working for a facility in MT which has narrowed down its
search to these two instruments. No vendors please, they've already given
their pitches.
Thanks,
Jay A.
Lundgren M.S., HTL (ASCP)
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
________________________________
Notice from St. Joseph Health System:
Please note that the information contained in this message may be privileged
and confidential and protected from disclosure.
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message and any included attachments are from Somerset Medical Center
and are intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this
message is confidential and may contain privileged, confidential,
proprietary and/or trade secret information entitled to protection and/or
exemption from disclosure under applicable law. Unauthorized forwarding,
printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is strictly
prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please
promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error
by e-mail or you may call Somerset Medical Center's computer Help Desk
at 908-685-2200, ext. 4050.
Be sure to visit Somerset Medical Center's Web site -
www.somersetmedicalcenter.com - for the most up-to-date news,
event listings, health information and more.
------------------------------
Message: 16
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 09:59:11 -0600
From: "gayle callis" <gayle.callis <@t> bresnan.net>
Subject: Testing for shrinkage RE: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong is a
piece of string type question
To: "'Edwards, Richard E.'" <ree3 <@t> leicester.ac.uk>,
<histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
Message-ID: <000401cb446e$7768f690$663ae3b0$@callis <@t> bresnan.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Have you ever thought of doing a shrinkage test? Take a tissue specimen,
and xerox or use a flat bed scanner. Put fixed sample between plastic
sheets, and scan it as unfixed tissue, fixed before processing and then
after processing while in a faced paraffin block. Take all the measurements
and then do the calculations./ We used to xerox large stained bone
sections, a clever way of getting a precise macro-images of a huge specimen
to show gross features of a defect. This did a better job than trying to do
a macro-photo with a camera or through a microscope (the latter doesn't
happen).
Years ago, when preparing for HTL exam practical, the samples e.g. tissue
sections submitted had to be within a certain size range, and it was duly
noted that after processing, the samples had shrinkage. This required going
back to fixed tissue and cutting a bigger piece to compensate for the
shrinkage and have a final correct sample/section size to follow the
practical rules.
As for GMA, there is a special processing schedule given to me that does not
use alcohol dehydration (for lipid staining work). This protocol uses an
GMA/watergradient since GMA is miscible with water. I would think there
would be even less shrinkage with a water/GMA gradient and the source of
shrinkage would come from the heat of polymerization and possibly a bit from
kind of fixative used. The heat can controlled to some degree by doing
polymerization on ice, or in a refrigerator, with the round JB4 metal chucks
to dissipate the heat.
Once again, I agree with Bryan Hewlett's assessment of shrinkage.
Gayle Callis
HTL/HT/MT(ASCP)
Bozeman MT
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Edwards,
Richard E.
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 7:50 AM
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong is a piece of string type question
Many thanks to all who responded, for paraffin processed tissues the
figures suggested for the amount of shrinkage found or expected were :-
"more than 5%":"5-10%":"10%"(twice):"10-15%":"20%":"25%":"30-35%":"30-40%",
one responder felt it was "noticeable" and another thought it was a "fairy
tale" concocted by pathologists............unsurprisingly many responders
thought that the degree of shrinkage was dependent on the fixative used,
processing schedule and the nature of the tissue itself, e.g. amount of
lipid present. As far as shrinkage with GMA processed tissue go, a single
response of "5%" was quoted.
Richard Edwards
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5396 (20100825) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature
database 5396 (20100825) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
------------------------------
Message: 17
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2010 11:26:38 -0500
From: Jan.Minshew <@t> leica-microsystems.com
Subject: Re: Testing for shrinkage RE: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong
is a piece of string type question
To: "gayle callis" <gayle.callis <@t> bresnan.net>
Cc: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu,
histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
<OF18F580BB.D897C54E-ON8625778A.0059A9E9-8625778A.005A5478 <@t> leica-microsyste
ms.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Hey lady,
How are you? I haven't seen you on Histonet much lately. I hope that
means that you are doing fun things and not working so hard.
We have settled in Plano. It's so nice to be around family! Will I
see you at NSH? If so, we have to have our night out again so we can
catch up on gossip...
Kind regards,
Jan Minshew
Marketing Manager
Leica Microsystems
Biosystems Division
2345 Waukegan Road
Bannockburn, IL 60015
Office: 847.405.7051
Cell: 847.970.8468
Fax: 847.405.6560
www.leica-microsystems.com
Click Here for this month's special offers!
[1]http://www.leica-microsystems.com/bsdspecial
"gayle callis" <gayle.callis <@t> bresnan.net>
Sent by: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
08/25/2010 10:59 AM
To
"'Edwards, Richard E.'" <ree3 <@t> leicester.ac.uk>,
<histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
cc
Subject
Testing for shrinkage RE: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong is a piece
of string type question
Have you ever thought of doing a shrinkage test? Take a tissue
specimen,
and xerox or use a flat bed scanner. Put fixed sample between plastic
sheets, and scan it as unfixed tissue, fixed before processing and
then
after processing while in a faced paraffin block. Take all the
measurements
and then do the calculations./ We used to xerox large stained bone
sections, a clever way of getting a precise macro-images of a huge
specimen
to show gross features of a defect. This did a better job than trying
to do
a macro-photo with a camera or through a microscope (the latter
doesn't
happen).
Years ago, when preparing for HTL exam practical, the samples e.g.
tissue
sections submitted had to be within a certain size range, and it was
duly
noted that after processing, the samples had shrinkage. This required
going
back to fixed tissue and cutting a bigger piece to compensate for the
shrinkage and have a final correct sample/section size to follow the
practical rules.
As for GMA, there is a special processing schedule given to me that
does not
use alcohol dehydration (for lipid staining work). This protocol uses
an
GMA/watergradient since GMA is miscible with water. I would think
there
would be even less shrinkage with a water/GMA gradient and the source
of
shrinkage would come from the heat of polymerization and possibly a
bit from
kind of fixative used. The heat can controlled to some degree by
doing
polymerization on ice, or in a refrigerator, with the round JB4 metal
chucks
to dissipate the heat.
Once again, I agree with Bryan Hewlett's assessment of shrinkage.
Gayle Callis
HTL/HT/MT(ASCP)
Bozeman MT
-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of
Edwards,
Richard E.
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2010 7:50 AM
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] shrinkage/a howlong is a piece of string type
question
Many thanks to all who responded, for paraffin processed tissues
the
figures suggested for the amount of shrinkage found or expected were
:-
"more than
5%":"5-10%":"10%"(twice):"10-15%":"20%":"25%":"30-35%":"30-40%",
one responder felt it was "noticeable" and another thought it was a
"fairy
tale" concocted by pathologists............unsurprisingly many
responders
thought that the degree of shrinkage was dependent on the fixative
used,
processing schedule and the nature of the tissue itself, e.g. amount
of
lipid present. As far as shrinkage with GMA processed tissue go, a
single
response of "5%" was quoted.
Richard Edwards
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature
database 5394 (20100824) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature
database 5396 (20100825) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
signature
database 5396 (20100825) __________
The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
http://www.eset.com
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________
References
1. http://www.leica-microsystems.com/bsdspecial
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
End of Histonet Digest, Vol 81, Issue 33
****************************************
Email Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this transmission is confidential, proprietary or privileged and may be subject to protection under the law, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The message is intended for the sole use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any use, distribution or copying of the message is strictly prohibited and may subject you to criminal or civil penalties. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender immediately by replying to this email and delete the material from any computer.
More information about the Histonet
mailing list