Cargando…

Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis

SIMPLE SUMMARY: Specimen collection and preservation can be challenging, especially when suboptimal conditions occur. A relevant amount of time could be required from sampling to the tissue analysis, and therefore a high-quality conservation technique is vitally important for diagnostic purposes. Th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Nicoletti, Arturo, Pregel, Paola, Starvaggi Cucuzza, Laura, Cannizzo, Francesca Tiziana, Sereno, Alessandra, Scaglione, Frine Eleonora
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8001879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33804460
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11030649
_version_ 1783671333006082048
author Nicoletti, Arturo
Pregel, Paola
Starvaggi Cucuzza, Laura
Cannizzo, Francesca Tiziana
Sereno, Alessandra
Scaglione, Frine Eleonora
author_facet Nicoletti, Arturo
Pregel, Paola
Starvaggi Cucuzza, Laura
Cannizzo, Francesca Tiziana
Sereno, Alessandra
Scaglione, Frine Eleonora
author_sort Nicoletti, Arturo
collection PubMed
description SIMPLE SUMMARY: Specimen collection and preservation can be challenging, especially when suboptimal conditions occur. A relevant amount of time could be required from sampling to the tissue analysis, and therefore a high-quality conservation technique is vitally important for diagnostic purposes. The aim of this study was the identification of a reliable and economic method for tissue preservation to be used in complex “in-field” situations, suitable for both histological and molecular analysis. Punch biopsies were collected from six cattle livers. Comparison among methods of preservation using RNAlater, silica beads, or under-vacuum was carried out using different times and temperatures. Three days were assumed as a maximum time interval from sampling to laboratory and 4 °C and 24 °C chosen as references for refrigeration temperature and room temperature, respectively. Histological and biomolecular analyses were performed. RNAlater and silica beads poorly preserved the histological parameters evaluated; conversely, vacuum-sealed samples showed a good grade of preservation for 48 h. DNA quality was acceptable for each sample. RNA integrity showed promising results for samples preserved with silica beads. ABSTRACT: A high quality of samples is crucial for the success of the analysis and diagnostic purposes, and therefore the right method of conservation is vitally important for an optimal preservation of tissues. Indeed, the time to deliver the sample to the laboratory could be remarkably long, especially under suboptimal conditions, and the use of specific fixatives or cold storage may not be possible. Moreover, the portability and cost of storage equipment, their toxicity, and their ease of use play a central role when choosing the correct preservation method. The aim of this study was the identification of a reliable and economic method for tissue preservation, to be used in “in-field” sampling, suitable for both histological and molecular analysis. Punch biopsies were collected from six cattle livers. Comparisons among methods of preservation using RNAlater, silica beads, and under-vacuum was carried out. These methods were tested through considering different times and temperatures, assuming three days as a maximum time interval from sampling to laboratory and choosing 4 °C and 24 °C as references for refrigeration temperature and room temperature, respectively. Histologically, the integrity of nucleus, cytoplasm, preservation of liver structure, and easiness of recognition of inflammatory infiltrate were evaluated. The integrity of the extracted DNA and RNA was evaluated through PCR and by means of an automated electrophoresis station, respectively. RNAlater and silica beads poorly preserved the histological parameters evaluated, independently from the temperature. Conversely, the vacuum-sealed samples showed a good grade of preservation until 48 h. DNA quality was acceptable for each sample. RNA integrity showed promising results only for samples preserved with silica beads.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8001879
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80018792021-03-28 Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis Nicoletti, Arturo Pregel, Paola Starvaggi Cucuzza, Laura Cannizzo, Francesca Tiziana Sereno, Alessandra Scaglione, Frine Eleonora Animals (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: Specimen collection and preservation can be challenging, especially when suboptimal conditions occur. A relevant amount of time could be required from sampling to the tissue analysis, and therefore a high-quality conservation technique is vitally important for diagnostic purposes. The aim of this study was the identification of a reliable and economic method for tissue preservation to be used in complex “in-field” situations, suitable for both histological and molecular analysis. Punch biopsies were collected from six cattle livers. Comparison among methods of preservation using RNAlater, silica beads, or under-vacuum was carried out using different times and temperatures. Three days were assumed as a maximum time interval from sampling to laboratory and 4 °C and 24 °C chosen as references for refrigeration temperature and room temperature, respectively. Histological and biomolecular analyses were performed. RNAlater and silica beads poorly preserved the histological parameters evaluated; conversely, vacuum-sealed samples showed a good grade of preservation for 48 h. DNA quality was acceptable for each sample. RNA integrity showed promising results for samples preserved with silica beads. ABSTRACT: A high quality of samples is crucial for the success of the analysis and diagnostic purposes, and therefore the right method of conservation is vitally important for an optimal preservation of tissues. Indeed, the time to deliver the sample to the laboratory could be remarkably long, especially under suboptimal conditions, and the use of specific fixatives or cold storage may not be possible. Moreover, the portability and cost of storage equipment, their toxicity, and their ease of use play a central role when choosing the correct preservation method. The aim of this study was the identification of a reliable and economic method for tissue preservation, to be used in “in-field” sampling, suitable for both histological and molecular analysis. Punch biopsies were collected from six cattle livers. Comparisons among methods of preservation using RNAlater, silica beads, and under-vacuum was carried out. These methods were tested through considering different times and temperatures, assuming three days as a maximum time interval from sampling to laboratory and choosing 4 °C and 24 °C as references for refrigeration temperature and room temperature, respectively. Histologically, the integrity of nucleus, cytoplasm, preservation of liver structure, and easiness of recognition of inflammatory infiltrate were evaluated. The integrity of the extracted DNA and RNA was evaluated through PCR and by means of an automated electrophoresis station, respectively. RNAlater and silica beads poorly preserved the histological parameters evaluated, independently from the temperature. Conversely, the vacuum-sealed samples showed a good grade of preservation until 48 h. DNA quality was acceptable for each sample. RNA integrity showed promising results only for samples preserved with silica beads. MDPI 2021-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8001879/ /pubmed/33804460 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11030649 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ).
spellingShingle Article
Nicoletti, Arturo
Pregel, Paola
Starvaggi Cucuzza, Laura
Cannizzo, Francesca Tiziana
Sereno, Alessandra
Scaglione, Frine Eleonora
Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis
title Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis
title_full Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis
title_fullStr Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis
title_short Coping with Tissue Sampling in Suboptimal Conditions: Comparison of Different Tissue Preservation Methods for Histological and Molecular Analysis
title_sort coping with tissue sampling in suboptimal conditions: comparison of different tissue preservation methods for histological and molecular analysis
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8001879/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33804460
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani11030649
work_keys_str_mv AT nicolettiarturo copingwithtissuesamplinginsuboptimalconditionscomparisonofdifferenttissuepreservationmethodsforhistologicalandmolecularanalysis
AT pregelpaola copingwithtissuesamplinginsuboptimalconditionscomparisonofdifferenttissuepreservationmethodsforhistologicalandmolecularanalysis
AT starvaggicucuzzalaura copingwithtissuesamplinginsuboptimalconditionscomparisonofdifferenttissuepreservationmethodsforhistologicalandmolecularanalysis
AT cannizzofrancescatiziana copingwithtissuesamplinginsuboptimalconditionscomparisonofdifferenttissuepreservationmethodsforhistologicalandmolecularanalysis
AT serenoalessandra copingwithtissuesamplinginsuboptimalconditionscomparisonofdifferenttissuepreservationmethodsforhistologicalandmolecularanalysis
AT scaglionefrineeleonora copingwithtissuesamplinginsuboptimalconditionscomparisonofdifferenttissuepreservationmethodsforhistologicalandmolecularanalysis