Re:Daily Digest

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From:"Young, Jean" <>
To:HistoNet Server <>
Content-Type:text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1

To Susan Cunningham
Can you give us more detail on what exactly the 3.2-3.5 blocks per paid hour
means?Thank you

____________________Reply Separator____________________
Subject:    Daily Digest
Author: "HistoNet Server" <>
Date:       7/23/00 9:15 PM


Date: 23 Jul 2000 03:46:03 -0500
From: <>
Subject: RE: subscribe digest

subscribe digest


Date: 23 Jul 2000 06:15:40 -0500
From: "Mary Bryhan" <>
Subject: Re: Prefer fixative

We have used Prefer for about 6 years now.  When we started using it, there
were some changes we had to go through with the help of our pathologists.
It takes patients and persistence to develop your IHC protocols.  There are
no antibodies that we can't get to work... we have a 100% success rate!  We
also use almost all BioGenex antibodies and reagents with the OptiMax
automated stainer.

Mary Bryhan HT (ASCP)
NMH - Petoskey,  MI

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Amos Brooks <>
To: sharon lang <>
Cc: <>
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2000 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: Prefer fixative

> Hi,
>     I had wars with tissue fixed in this stuff. We had tissue sent from
> labs to us, often the tissue was fixed in Prefer sometimes they didn't
> this. Firstly just give up on KI67 and Herceptest. Some tests stained
> others didn't unless you skipped antigen retrieval, while still others
> extra retrieval. It was a pain. Take it test by test if you must use it.
> to formalin if you can.
> by the way the H&Es look beautiful!
> Amos Brooks
> sharon lang wrote:
> > Dear Fellow Histonetters:
> > I am interested in any input from my colleagues regarding Prefer
> > If you use it, do you have to antigen retrieve..are your special stains
> > and muddy???   Please help.
> > Sharon
> > The Cutting Edge
> > ________________________________________________________________________
> > Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at


Date: 23 Jul 2000 08:30:13 -0500
From: Joseph Passero <>
Subject: Available a Reichart EPI Fluorescence microscope.....

        From a hematology lab a Reichart MicroStar IV EPI Fluorescence

        This instrument has a binocular head with 10X wide field eyepieces,
model 181

        A five place nose piece with three infinity corrected Neoplan
        10X / 0.25, 40X / 0.66 and 100X /1.25 oil.

        Also the lining up objective for the HBO lamp.

        The EPI fluorescence illumination system is HBO 100 watt lamp with a
Model 2091
Mercury/Xeon power supply.

        It has one excitation and barrier filter assembly (with a position for
a second one),
number 1713.

        For standard transmitted light it has an Abbe Aspherical 1.25
condenser with diaphragm
on a rack and pinion. The illumination system built in to the base is a 6 volt
20 watt halogen
lamp with blue and neutral density filter.

        The mechanical stage has right hand low position coaxial controls (X
and Y axis), with
graduated vernier.

        JPG photos available, the instrument is in excellent condition.

        If you are interested make a Reasonable Offer for the instrument.

Thank You

Best Regards

Joseph Passero

201-966-3112 Voice Phone Number

201-869-2944 Fax Phone Number


Date: 23 Jul 2000 19:30:41 -0500

Dear Peggy
I used the tape coverslipper on my slides for the boards in 1996 and I still
have slides that I didn't send to them, you know the ones that were ok but
not perfect, anyway last year I was working somewhere else and was asked if I
had used this before, when I dug out my old slides only 3 yrs old the tape
had pulled away from the slides and the some tissue was on the tape and away
from the slide. Some seemed to be faded, all I can say is thank goodness the
boards read the slides quite fast if not It wouldn't had been pretty. That
was mine own personal experience. It could be that we had just gotten the
machine and wasn't adjusting the machine to put out enough
glue or maybe we were using to much. I haven't heard of the lab having any
problems with it. I just know most histology supervisors like the glass
slipcovers better.
Good luck
Sandi Miller HT
MRICD Research


Date: 23 Jul 2000 19:55:19 -0500
From: jtsonger <>

We had the tape coverslipper for several years, and while no problems occured
immediately, problems did develop over time. The tape lifted on about 200 of
the teaching slide sets. I was not a happy camper when I had to recover them
with glass. Some of them were beyond help and I had to re-cut about 100. The
pathologists never liked the tape from day 1 because they said the resolution
was different from glass (makes sense to me) and they could never get a sharp
photograph. We do a lot research and teaching slides, so I switched to glass
coverslipper about 5 years ago. I don't know about the new ones, they might be

much better.

>===== Original Message From Lee & Peggy Wenk <> =====
>Have some questions from our pathologists -
>How long have the tape coverslippers been in use in

>histology labs? How "old" is the oldest tape coverslipper?
>Any one out there been using one for that long?
>For those who have been using a tape coverslipper
>for that long, have you gone back and looked at
>the quality of the coverslip on these old slides?
>Are they falling off? Curling up around the edges?
>Turning yellow? Turning opaque? Getting bleaching
>or leeching of tissue stains? etc. I'm looking
>for consistent trends, not the every-now-and-then
>We have had our tape coverslipper for about 5
>years, and have not had any of the above problems,
>other than one occasional slide out of thousands.
>But our pathologists would like to hear from
>labs with more years of use, to see if they have
>had any of these problems.
>Please note: I'm NOT saying these coverslippers
>are bad. We love ours (we have 2). Just looking
>to see if any changes can be expected down the
>We did this when we were coverslipping by hand.
>We used to use a synthetic mounting media that
>flowed great while coverslipping (good point),
>took a long time to set (bad point), stains looked
>great when first viewed (good point), but if you
>pulled the same slides some years later, the
>H&E stains were bleached out (very bad point).
>So we switched to the more modern synthetic
>mounting media with anti-oxidant and plasticisor,
>and we didn't see that problem again. And, of
>course, had to remove the coverslip and restain
>any old slides that the pathologists needed to
>do a review on. (No, we didn't restain all
>"trillion" slides.)
>So we just want to see what problems, if any, might
>be arising in the future with the tape coverslipper.
>Thanks in advance for any information.
>Peggy A. Wenk, HTL(ASCP)
>William Beaumont Hospital
>Royal Oak, MI 48073


Date: 23 Jul 2000 23:45:53 -0500
From: Client <>

I recently attended a benchmarking and productivity session at the CLMA
Conference in Anaheim. "What Senior Management Wants to Know" by Ellen
Neiduski, Applied Management System Inc. Ellen shared several industry
benchmarks her firm uses for operational reviews.

The Histology benchmark presented was 3.2 - 3.5 blocks per paid hour. The paid
hour includes all staff from accessioning to slides out to pathologists, so no
transcriptionist's time. Paid hour is more comprehensive than FTE and covers
actual hours paid out - vacation, sick, overtime, relief, etc.

Suzane Cunningham
Manager, Cellular & Tissue Pathology
Royal Columbian Hospital
New Westminster, BC
(604) 520 - 4757

Here are the messages received yesterday!

Received: from by
        with ESMTP (Fabrik F07.3-000)
        id ; Sun, 23 Jul 2000 22:16:37 -0800
Received: from ([])
 by SWVX12.SWMED.EDU (PMDF V6.0-24 #40510)
 with SMTP id <01JS4J68J0I895PAJS@SWVX12.SWMED.EDU> for; Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:16:06 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2000 00:15:40 -0500 (CDT)
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by SWVX12.SWMED.EDU
From: HistoNet Server <>
Subject: Daily Digest
To: HistoNet Server <>
Message-id: <n1247724698.*2830@SWVX12.SWMED.EDU>


<< Previous Message | Next Message >>