[Histonet] Changing dynamics in histotechnology

Mon Sep 17 18:19:59 CDT 2012

Tim, I really appreciated your insights and thoughts on this thread. I actually had someone tell me recently I was the only histotech they had ever known that had gone through a histology program. And Jesus,  your statement " As for the LIS, we are still creating the same LIS to do the same process we currently have and not help us transform into this new world of technology and application", this is the greatest sentence that I have read in months, and exactly what I wish to correct somehow/someday, it's infuriating.I only wish the original link to the article worked for me, after reading these comments I'd really like to read it. 

Joelle Weaver MAOM, HTL (ASCP) QIHC
 > From: JEllin <@t> yumaregional.org
> To: JEllin <@t> yumaregional.org
> Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 21:15:25 +0000
> Subject: Re: [Histonet] Changing dynamics in histotechnology
> CC: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu; Timothy.Morken <@t> ucsfmedctr.org
> 
> Sorry hit the sent button,,
> 
> but as for this we are going to be required to be even more accurate with the uses of our tools for diagnosis.
> 
> As for the LIS,, we are still creating the same LIS to do the same process we currently have and not help us transform into this new world of technology and application
> 
> Digital Pathology,, all I can say is that why are we trying to make this thing do what a microscope does,, I have yet to understand that thinking.  It is not a microscope, because it offers more than it.  But no one has taken a look at what is the histologys usage of this technology  
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:12 PM, "Jesus Ellin" <JEllin <@t> yumaregional.org> wrote:
> 
> > Tim,
> > 
> > I think basic histology is going to be manual,, but i see the explosion of technology sweeping our field.
> > 
> > As Bill states it all about standardization,, but try getting the same H and E across the board,, thats not going to happen
> > 
> > IHC will always we a bread and butter, but now since the government has limited the amoun t of IHC per patient, we are going to see a lot changes here.  With only 4 IHC per patient 
> > 
> > Sent from my iPad
> > 
> > On Sep 17, 2012, at 2:00 PM, "Morken, Timothy" <Timothy.Morken <@t> ucsfmedctr.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> Histology is going to have a huge manual component for a long time. Even though embedding has been automated to a certain extent it has not been accepted by many...yet. Automated sectioning is a long way off - and who would have the money to buy sectioning robots that could do as well as a human? Would it even be cost effective (and that IS the question!)? 
> >> 
> >> Much of this could be made much easier by proper application of grossing/processing/embedding procedures. But we can't even get pathologists to agree how long any particular tissue should be fixed - no matter what the literature says. Good luck standardizing grossing and tissue processing across a single large department, let alone the entire industry (though I know Bill has done wonders with this in his company). Simply due to that lack of standardization manual work will be with us for a LONG time since every block requires individual care and decision making by the person sectioning it. 
> >> 
> >> IHC is bread and butter to the lab now. ISH is coming along but still too rare to make much money off of it, if any at all. I don't think we do much more of it percentage wise than 20 years ago. 
> >> 
> >> The best IHC techs take interest in the cases, learn what the antibodies are for and pay attention to the staining they get (if they have time before the TAT deadline!).  They do research on diseases and can converse with pathologist about the results.
> >> 
> >> Molecular methods (ie, DNA/RNA, besides ISH) is quite different than histology. Completely different training required, though I have no doubt histotechs could do it, why would they hire a histotech when there are umpteen biochemists applying for every biology job advertised (including histology!!)?
> >> 
> >> Digital pathology is still "promising," just as it was 10 years ago, and will be "promising" 5 or 10 years from now unless a technology comes along to scan slides FAST - ie 10 seconds, not 5 minutes. Maybe someone will adapt the Lytro Light Field Camera to slide scanning. Seems a perfect match (google it!).
> >> 
> >> Barcoding is on the way in. We are going to have a system by June 2013. But it is in the growing stage and there are lots of tradeoffs. The hardware has just become available in the last 5 years to make it reliable. Now the vendors have to get going. Some have with great systems  - Ventana, possibly Leica, Omnitrax. The LIS vendors have fallen flat on their faces on this - totally missed the boat and ceded the specimen tracking space to histology and IHC vendors. Shows what happens when your company is too big and you don't pay attention to the possibilities. As recently as 3 years ago I had an LIS vendor technical person ask me what on earth I would use bar coding for in histology. I hope that guy has been fired by now for ignorance!
> >> 
> >> Of course one huge disadvantage to having histology and IHC vendors providing barcoding/tracking systems is some want to limit your choices to their instruments. That is a big bugaboo right now. But I understand Clinical Chemistry is dealing with the same issue - instrument vendors forcing certain parameters on the lab.
> >> 
> >> Training of histotechs is and always will be a problem. 95+% of histotechs are trained OJT. I think there is only one program on the west coast. So, for the most part forget formally trained techs (and those that are formally trained should make the most of it!). It is all dependent on individual initiative and the training skill of the lab managers they work for. NSH is doing a pretty good job - and I only say that because while the various meetings are great, only a small percentage attend. The vast majority of histotechs don't ever get outside training, either because they don't know about it, don't have the money, or their labs don't promote it.  A lot of techs work in labs whose managers consider advancement a bad thing - train a tech and they look for better pay elsewhere. How do you counter those types?
> >> 
> >> Most pathologists trained these days are clueless about histology and aren't concerned about  much else beyond ordering and getting their slides. Histology is a black box to them.  They wouldn't have a clue how to train a histotech if they had to.
> >> 
> >> All I can say on this is that everyone has to take care of themselves and their own advancement first. Hopefully those same people will see the value of training others in any way they can and promoting getting more involved with the entire system. 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Tim Morken
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Jesus Ellin
> >> Sent: Monday, September 17, 2012 12:22 PM
> >> To: Judy O'Rourke
> >> Cc: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> >> Subject: Re: [Histonet] Changing dynamics in histotechnology
> >> 
> >> With mixed emotions I read this article, not because of its context or information, but rather the outlook for our future.  
> >> 
> >> I would like to pole on the histonet today, who is enter in:
> >> 
> >> 1.  Digital Pathology
> >> 2.  Molecular Testing (ISH, PCR, Next Gene Sequencing) 3.  Automation Semi to complete 4.  Barcoding 
> >> 
> >> A good question to ask is, are we, as Histology professionals, positioned to make this change.  Case in point, how many people are signed up and preparing for this transition at the NSH convention this year?  
> >> 
> >> Sent from my iPad
> >> 
> >> On Sep 17, 2012, at 8:29 AM, "Judy O'Rourke" <jorourke <@t> allied360.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Hello...
> >>> 
> >>> In Clinical Lab Products' just-released September issue, the article 
> >>> "Changing Dynamics in Histotechnology" addresses the challenges and 
> >>> trends you face daily. William DeSalvo, B.S., HTL(ASCP), chair, NSH 
> >>> Quality Control Committee, is quoted.
> >>> 
> >>> Please share comments on CLP's Facebook page, where I've just posted 
> >>> the
> >>> article: 
> >>> http://www.facebook.com/pages/Clinical-Lab-Products/56624886500#!/page
> >>> s/Clin
> >>> ical-Lab-Products/56624886500
> >>> 
> >>> Thank you!
> >>> 
> >>> Judy
> >>> 
> >>> JUDY O'ROURKE |  Editor
> >>> Clinical Lab Products
> >>> 6100 Center Drive, Suite 1020, Los Angeles, CA 90045 office 
> >>> 619.659.1065 | fax 619.659.1065 jorourke <@t> allied360.com | 
> >>> www.clpmag.com
> >>> 
> >>> Follow us on Facebook, and follow me on Twitter at @editorCLPmag
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Histonet mailing list
> >>> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> >>> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
> >> 
> >> ______________________________________________________________________
> >> This message is confidential, intended only for the named
> >> recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that the dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited.  If you receive this message in error, or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender at either the e-mail, fax, address, or telephone number listed above and delete this e-mail from your computer. 
> >> Thank You.
> >> ______________________________________________________________________
> >> 
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Histonet mailing list
> >> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> >> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
> >> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This message is confidential, intended only for the named 
> recipient(s) and may contain information that is privileged 
> or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are 
> not the intended recipient(s), you are notified that the 
> dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is 
> strictly prohibited.  If you receive this message in error, 
> or are not the named recipient(s), please notify the sender 
> at either the e-mail, fax, address, or telephone number 
> listed above and delete this e-mail from your computer. 
> Thank You.
> ______________________________________________________________________
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet