Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods

OBJECTIVES: Tissue processing for years is carried out by the conventional method, which is a time-consuming technique resulting in 1-day delay in diagnosis. However, in this area of modernization and managed care, rapid diagnosis is increasingly desirable to fulfill the needs of clinicians. The obj...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Singla, Kartesh, Sandhu, Simarpreet Virk, Pal, Rana A. G. K., Bansal, Himanta, Bhullar, Ramanpreet Kaur, Kaur, Preetinder
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Qassim Uninversity 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5426407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28539860
_version_ 1783235469079740416
author Singla, Kartesh
Sandhu, Simarpreet Virk
Pal, Rana A. G. K.
Bansal, Himanta
Bhullar, Ramanpreet Kaur
Kaur, Preetinder
author_facet Singla, Kartesh
Sandhu, Simarpreet Virk
Pal, Rana A. G. K.
Bansal, Himanta
Bhullar, Ramanpreet Kaur
Kaur, Preetinder
author_sort Singla, Kartesh
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Tissue processing for years is carried out by the conventional method, which is a time-consuming technique resulting in 1-day delay in diagnosis. However, in this area of modernization and managed care, rapid diagnosis is increasingly desirable to fulfill the needs of clinicians. The objective of the present study was to compare and determine the positive impact on turnaround times of different tissue processing methods by comparing the color intensity, cytoplasmic details, and nuclear details of the tissues processed by three methods. METHODS: A total of sixty biopsied tissues were grossed and cut into three equal parts. One part was processed by conventional method, second by rapid manual, and third by microwave-assisted method. The slides obtained after processing were circulated among four observers for evaluation. Sections processed by the three techniques were subjected to statistical analysis by Kruskal–Wallis test. Cronbach’s alpha reliability test was applied to assess the reliability among observers. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparing mean shrinkage before and after processing. RESULTS: All observers were assumed to be reliable as the Cronbach’s reliability test was statistically significant. The results were statistically non-significant as observed by Kruskal–Wallis test. One-way ANOVA revealed a significant value on comparison of the tissue shrinkage processed by the three techniques. The histological evaluation of the tissues revealed that the nuclear-cytoplasmic contrast was good in tissues processed by microwave, followed by conventional and rapid manual processing techniques. The color intensity of the tissues processed by microwave was crisper, and there was a good contrast between the hematoxylin and eosin-stained areas as compared to manual methods. CONCLUSION: The overall quality of tissues from all the three methods was similar. It was not feasible to distinguish between the three techniques by observing the tissue sections. Microwave-assisted tissue processing has reduced the time from sample reception to diagnosis, thus enabling the same-day processing and diagnosis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5426407
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Qassim Uninversity
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-54264072017-05-24 Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods Singla, Kartesh Sandhu, Simarpreet Virk Pal, Rana A. G. K. Bansal, Himanta Bhullar, Ramanpreet Kaur Kaur, Preetinder Int J Health Sci (Qassim) Original Article OBJECTIVES: Tissue processing for years is carried out by the conventional method, which is a time-consuming technique resulting in 1-day delay in diagnosis. However, in this area of modernization and managed care, rapid diagnosis is increasingly desirable to fulfill the needs of clinicians. The objective of the present study was to compare and determine the positive impact on turnaround times of different tissue processing methods by comparing the color intensity, cytoplasmic details, and nuclear details of the tissues processed by three methods. METHODS: A total of sixty biopsied tissues were grossed and cut into three equal parts. One part was processed by conventional method, second by rapid manual, and third by microwave-assisted method. The slides obtained after processing were circulated among four observers for evaluation. Sections processed by the three techniques were subjected to statistical analysis by Kruskal–Wallis test. Cronbach’s alpha reliability test was applied to assess the reliability among observers. One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used for comparing mean shrinkage before and after processing. RESULTS: All observers were assumed to be reliable as the Cronbach’s reliability test was statistically significant. The results were statistically non-significant as observed by Kruskal–Wallis test. One-way ANOVA revealed a significant value on comparison of the tissue shrinkage processed by the three techniques. The histological evaluation of the tissues revealed that the nuclear-cytoplasmic contrast was good in tissues processed by microwave, followed by conventional and rapid manual processing techniques. The color intensity of the tissues processed by microwave was crisper, and there was a good contrast between the hematoxylin and eosin-stained areas as compared to manual methods. CONCLUSION: The overall quality of tissues from all the three methods was similar. It was not feasible to distinguish between the three techniques by observing the tissue sections. Microwave-assisted tissue processing has reduced the time from sample reception to diagnosis, thus enabling the same-day processing and diagnosis. Qassim Uninversity 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5426407/ /pubmed/28539860 Text en Copyright: © International Journal of Health Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Singla, Kartesh
Sandhu, Simarpreet Virk
Pal, Rana A. G. K.
Bansal, Himanta
Bhullar, Ramanpreet Kaur
Kaur, Preetinder
Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
title Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
title_full Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
title_short Comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
title_sort comparative evaluation of different histoprocessing methods
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5426407/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28539860
work_keys_str_mv AT singlakartesh comparativeevaluationofdifferenthistoprocessingmethods
AT sandhusimarpreetvirk comparativeevaluationofdifferenthistoprocessingmethods
AT palranaagk comparativeevaluationofdifferenthistoprocessingmethods
AT bansalhimanta comparativeevaluationofdifferenthistoprocessingmethods
AT bhullarramanpreetkaur comparativeevaluationofdifferenthistoprocessingmethods
AT kaurpreetinder comparativeevaluationofdifferenthistoprocessingmethods