[Histonet] EM tissue processors

[Morken, Timothy]

Thomas, I forgot to answer your other questions. The RMC and Leica conventional processors are similar in function and do a fine job of processing samples. We had the RMC for many years before getting the Leica. We use the RMC as a back-up now. 

The RMC will hold more samples due to a much larger vial. It is reliable, but repairs require you send the unit to the factory in Tucson. They are very helpful but do not have a field staff. The Leica will do on-site repairs and offers service contracts. RMC does not have service contracts.  I have only had to send the RMC in for repairs once after almost 8 years of use. It had been pretty beat up and since we got it back it has performed flawlessly. 

So far the Leica can handle what we need to do  a maximum (so far )of 12 samples in one batch. 

Both are easy to use and to program. Once they are programmed they are simple to start. Both will heat and cool the sample, though I think the Leica is more uniform since the cooling/warming chamber completely encloses the vial. The RMC uses a Piezo block to cool/warm one side of the sample. 

The Leica goes through the routine a little faster because the reagent change-over is a little faster. The RMC has a cap on each vial that has to be removed (automated) while the Leica does not (vial caps are attached to the lid). It is about 15 minutes on a 3 hour schedule, so not really significant. (depends on the number of vials your protocol has). One difference - since the Leica has the vial covers attached to the lid you cannot take the lid off. With the RMC, if you have inside a fume hood you can take the lid off for more convenient access (Actually, with the RMC you cannot use the lid in a fume hood because it attached at the back of the unit and would be blocked from opening). 

The RMC fits in a regular fume hood. The Leica does not - it is too long front to back, and you could not anyway because the lid must be attached and will not lift because the backside would be hard against the back of the hood. However, Both have covers, exhaust fans and hoses to vent into a fume hood. Right now we have the RMC in the hood (a 6-foot hood) and the Leica outside. We have not had any fume problems with the Leica (we used to have the RMC Outside the hood and did not have any problems with it either. We had a new, larger hood installed and put it in there because it would not fit on the bench next to the Leica).

As I mentioned, there is no significant difference in cost of the reagents, and both units perform fine. We got the Leica only because we wanted a back-up and wanted to get a more modern  instrument. Our validation showed they perform identically to process tissue to our specs.

Tim

-----Original Message-----
From: Morken, Timothy 
Sent: Monday, August 05, 2013 10:37 AM
To: 'Tom Strader'; histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: RE: [Histonet] EM tissue processors

Thomas,

We use the RMC and the Leica TP-EM (conventional) EM tissue processors, They are similar in equipment cost and vial pricing (in fact, I believe the vials are made in the same facility) about 15K. Our consumable costs for both units (buffers, osmium, solvents, resin) comes to about $13.00 per batch, and works out to $2.57 per case (about 5 cases per day average).  We re-use the non-resin vials for a week each to save a bit. For us the equipment payback is about 166 working days (saves about 2 hours tech time per day - changing reagents manually).  

The Leica MW processor is about $50K, so the payback will be about 3.5 times longer. The reagent cost for manual vs any automated system won't be much different and are reagents are so cheap it is not a significant cost compared to labor costs.

We do mostly kidneys, but also muscle (6 cases/wk) liver, heart, blood, and some tumor. We run all samples on a 3-hour processing schedule so we can get outside cases done the same day they come in. 


Tim Morken
Supervisor, Electron Microscopy/Neuromuscular Special Studies Department of Pathology UC San Francisco Medical Center



-----Original Message-----
From: histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu [mailto:histonet-bounces <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Strader
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 9:43 AM
To: histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] EM tissue processors

Hi,
I'm comparing operating costs relative to features/benefits of automatic EM tissue processors (e.g. Leica, RMC, Lynx,.) with or without microwave and was wondering if anyone else had already done the same. I'd like to compare total costs per specimen and relative advantages/disadvantages of each system. I'm looking at the cost of consumables, reagents and labor separately and am also interested in reliability, efficiency and ease-of-use.
I'd greatly appreciate it if anyone has information they can share.
Feel free to contact me at the address below if you have questions.
Thanks!
Best regards,
Tom
 
Thomas E. Strader, MS
Heartland Biotech | Madison, WI, USA | 608-770-7649 | <http://www.heartlandbiotech.com> www.heartlandbiotech.com tom.strader <@t> heartlandbiotech.com
 
 
 
_______________________________________________
Histonet mailing list
Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet