RE:
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From: | "Petrilli, Michael" <Michael.Petrilli@med.va.gov> |
To: | 'amos brooks' <atbrooks@snet.net>, "George, Cheryl" <CGerorge@optima.org> |
Reply-To: | |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
In regards to prostate bxs...we receive six on each patient. Right side and
left side are placed their own cassettes (A&B). The bxs are inked by the
resident to distinguish which prostate lobe is which. Has been working
well....making our life a littler easier.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: amos brooks [SMTP:atbrooks@snet.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 3:25 PM
> To: George, Cheryl
> Cc: 'histonet@pathology.swmed.edu'
> Subject: Re:
>
> Hi,
> Definately, use Eosin. It is simple and already in abundance in most
> labs.
> We have been using it recently and what a difference. Not only are
> embedders
> less likely to miss one of our prostate biopsies, but the cutters can see
> the
> tissues better so they are less apt to face through the block. Putting a
> couple
> hundred ml in the 80% (or 70%) should be sufficient and the stain in the
> tissue
> is removed during rehydration after being cut. So it doesn't interfere
> with
> specials or IHC.
> Amos Brooks
>
> "George, Cheryl" wrote:
>
> > We used to use mercurachrome in our 70% ROH on the tissue processor to
> tint
> > our small biopsies in order that the embedding techs could see them
> better.
> > However, it is now almost impossible to find this. Does anyone have any
> > suggestions for a substitute?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Cheryl George, HT (ASCP)
> > Histology/Cytology Supervisor
> > NHML
> > (603)663-2686
> > e-mail - cgerorge@optima.org
>
>
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>