Cargando…

Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting

Histopathology is the most useful tool for diagnosis of a number of diseases, especially cancer. To be effective, histopathology requires that tissues be fixed prior to processing. Formalin is currently the most common histologic fixative, offering many advantages: it is cheap, readily available, an...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Craft, William F., Conway, Julia A., Dark, Michael J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4017885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24860702
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.377
_version_ 1782480021384855552
author Craft, William F.
Conway, Julia A.
Dark, Michael J.
author_facet Craft, William F.
Conway, Julia A.
Dark, Michael J.
author_sort Craft, William F.
collection PubMed
description Histopathology is the most useful tool for diagnosis of a number of diseases, especially cancer. To be effective, histopathology requires that tissues be fixed prior to processing. Formalin is currently the most common histologic fixative, offering many advantages: it is cheap, readily available, and pathologists are routinely trained to examine tissues fixed in formalin. However, formalin fixation substantially degrades tissue DNA, hindering subsequent use in diagnostics and research. We therefore evaluated three alternative fixatives, TissueTek(®) Xpress(®) Molecular Fixative, modified methacarn, and PAXgene(®), all of which have been proposed as formalin alternatives, to determine their suitability for routine use in a veterinary diagnostic laboratory. This was accomplished by examining the histomorphology of sections produced from fixed tissues as well as the ability to amplify fragments from extracted DNA. Tissues were sampled from two dogs and four cats, fixed for 24–48 h, and processed routinely. While all fixatives produced acceptable histomorphology, formalin had significantly better morphologic characteristics than the other three fixatives. Alternative fixatives generally had better DNA amplification than formalin, although results varied somewhat depending on the tissue examined. While no fixative is yet ready to replace formalin, the alternative fixatives examined may be useful as adjuncts to formalin in diagnostic practices.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4017885
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40178852014-05-23 Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting Craft, William F. Conway, Julia A. Dark, Michael J. PeerJ Molecular Biology Histopathology is the most useful tool for diagnosis of a number of diseases, especially cancer. To be effective, histopathology requires that tissues be fixed prior to processing. Formalin is currently the most common histologic fixative, offering many advantages: it is cheap, readily available, and pathologists are routinely trained to examine tissues fixed in formalin. However, formalin fixation substantially degrades tissue DNA, hindering subsequent use in diagnostics and research. We therefore evaluated three alternative fixatives, TissueTek(®) Xpress(®) Molecular Fixative, modified methacarn, and PAXgene(®), all of which have been proposed as formalin alternatives, to determine their suitability for routine use in a veterinary diagnostic laboratory. This was accomplished by examining the histomorphology of sections produced from fixed tissues as well as the ability to amplify fragments from extracted DNA. Tissues were sampled from two dogs and four cats, fixed for 24–48 h, and processed routinely. While all fixatives produced acceptable histomorphology, formalin had significantly better morphologic characteristics than the other three fixatives. Alternative fixatives generally had better DNA amplification than formalin, although results varied somewhat depending on the tissue examined. While no fixative is yet ready to replace formalin, the alternative fixatives examined may be useful as adjuncts to formalin in diagnostic practices. PeerJ Inc. 2014-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC4017885/ /pubmed/24860702 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.377 Text en © 2014 Craft et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, reproduction and adaptation in any medium and for any purpose provided that it is properly attributed. For attribution, the original author(s), title, publication source (PeerJ) and either DOI or URL of the article must be cited.
spellingShingle Molecular Biology
Craft, William F.
Conway, Julia A.
Dark, Michael J.
Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
title Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
title_full Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
title_fullStr Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
title_short Comparison of histomorphology and DNA preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
title_sort comparison of histomorphology and dna preservation produced by fixatives in the veterinary diagnostic laboratory setting
topic Molecular Biology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4017885/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24860702
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.377
work_keys_str_mv AT craftwilliamf comparisonofhistomorphologyanddnapreservationproducedbyfixativesintheveterinarydiagnosticlaboratorysetting
AT conwayjuliaa comparisonofhistomorphologyanddnapreservationproducedbyfixativesintheveterinarydiagnosticlaboratorysetting
AT darkmichaelj comparisonofhistomorphologyanddnapreservationproducedbyfixativesintheveterinarydiagnosticlaboratorysetting