[Histonet] Histonet Digest, Vol 203, Issue 21

[Eddie Martin]

Hi Histonet and W.A. Hassan,

Supposing you have a slide volume of 15-20k slides per year & currently use
a Dako instrument, but would like feedback on whether to get a:
                  * Bond Max, or
                  * Roche Ultra

My response would depend more than what your yearly slide volume is.
                  * If...continually loading of slides while having access
to the reagent carousel is important to you, then I'd say Roche Ultra has
the advantage.
                  *If...having more control of your IHC protocols to change
your retrieval conditions, or even loading one time retrieval conditions
without saving it as a new protocol, then I'd say Leica Bond has the
advantage.

It really depends on what your lab will be staining is what I'm getting
to.
Another factor to include is ease of use.  Roche Ultra is literally a lot
easier to use than Leica Bond, and Leica Bond is easier to use than the old
Dako's or Dako Flex or similarly Thermo or Biocare IHC instruments.
                   * If you're staining odd protocols and want an
instrument staining biomarker assays at variant conditions outside the
norm:
                     (ie: staining 50-100 micron frozen sections looking
for nerve bundles, or trying to perform FISH protocols on the instrument
without an installed FISH protocol on the instrument), then Leica is the
choice.

quasi molecular staining:
                            1.   if your lab is interested in using m-RNA
oligo probes, choose Leica, as they have an easier setup to using different
vendors other than their own mRNA detection.
                            2.   if your physician staff prefers to see
probes with a matte background, only showing positive probe staining
(though using an older, yet very robust detection method), then Roche Ultra
has the advantage.

If you're at a reference Lab and molecular performing testing that used to
be molecular based, but is now available via IHC, then Roche Ultra has a
huge advantage, particularly for the therapeutic and theranostic biomarkers
commercially available.

Other factors to consider in your choice:
                    *Cost
                    * footprint of the instrument in your lab
                   * disposing of waste
                   * daily, weekly & monthly maintenance of the instrument
                   * cost of service.  Using a third party biomedical group
to repair or PM the instrument removes the IVD status of the instrument,
especially if you're staining any Class II's or higher, like CD117, or ER,
PR, Her2Neu...etc.
                                                ***Its ok if you're just
using it for research if this doesn't apply.

I hope this list helps you think what your team would like to use.  if your
pathologist and additional primary stakeholders would like to contact me...
you can.
I previously was a application specialist for IHC/probes with Leica
Microsystems up to 8 years ago.  However, I use a lot of Roche family of
instruments in my lab, as I'm a contracted lead for a well known
anatomic/clinical pathology laboratory.

Best regards,
Eddie Martin, HT, HTL, QIHC

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 1:00 PM <histonet-request at lists.utsouthwestern.edu>
wrote:

> Send Histonet mailing list submissions to
>         histonet at 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 at lists.utsouthwestern.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         histonet-owner at 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. Selection of IHC system (warda hassan)
>    2. Re: Selection of IHC system (Tina Van Meter)
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: warda hassan <redrose297 at gmail.com>
> To: "histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu" <histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> >
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 22:48:14 +0400
> Subject: [Histonet] Selection of IHC system
> Dear Histonet
>
> Our lab is looking to purchase a new IHC system.
> Currently we are working with Dako.
> I would request your valuable feedback on :-
>
> 1- Bond max ( Leica)
> 2- Bench Mark Ultra (Roche Diagnostic)
>
> Workload is 15,000-20,000 slides/year.
>
> Many thanks in advance for your help.
>
> Kind regards
> W.A Hassan
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Tina Van Meter <tina.vanmeter at gmail.com>
> To: warda hassan <redrose297 at gmail.com>
> Cc: Histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> Bcc:
> Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2020 23:08:07 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Histonet] Selection of IHC system
> Bond Max
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2020, 2:53 PM warda hassan via Histonet <
> histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu> wrote:
>
> > Dear Histonet
> >
> > Our lab is looking to purchase a new IHC system.
> > Currently we are working with Dako.
> > I would request your valuable feedback on :-
> >
> > 1- Bond max ( Leica)
> > 2- Bench Mark Ultra (Roche Diagnostic)
> >
> > Workload is 15,000-20,000 slides/year.
> >
> > Many thanks in advance for your help.
> >
> > Kind regards
> > W.A Hassan
> > _______________________________________________
> > Histonet mailing list
> > Histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> > http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> Histonet mailing list
> Histonet at lists.utsouthwestern.edu
> http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet