RE: [Histonet] Nuclear artefact II

From:"Kemlo Rogerson"

Thought we had agreed a common cause for this? Poor fixation from either
using a suboptimal fixative, or a fixative for a suboptimal period,
followed by processing that may, or may not, cause artefacts.

You say that you've varied the time of fixation (formalin) but have you
varied the fixative? Cytologists rarely (I think) see this artefact in
their preparations and I've certainly not seen it in LBC slides (either
Cytyc or Sure Path) but I've seen in many Histology Labs in the UK. The
difference? Cytology specimens are 'usually' better fixed (albeit with
alcohol and acetic acid) and not processed. Have you tried 'Carnoy's'
range of fixative for short periods on thin blocks? 

You have to try and do this scientifically as I get the feeling that the
artefact may be caused by a variety of things but IMHO fixation (poor)
is the main causative one.

Kemlo Rogerson
Pathology Manager
DD   01934 647057 or extension 3311
Mob 07749 754194; Pager 07659 597107;
Your job is a manifestation of your spirit in the physical world. You
can pretend that this is not the case, basically ignore it, or you can
consciously claim it. You get to choose. --Ric Giardina 

This e-mail is confidential and privileged. If you are not the intended
recipient please accept my apologies; please do not disclose, copy or
distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on
its contents: to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
Please inform me that this message has gone astray before deleting it.
Thank you for your co-operation

Histonet mailing list

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>