Hello everybody!!, Well then let me begin!
I'm in dire need of pictures demonstrating special stains such as Masson
Fontana, PAMS,GAF, PAS, Verhoeff Van Gieson,HPS, WVG,GRT,GMS.
Could anyone please direct me to the proper websites which will contain
these pictures,
Thank you for your time.
-----Original Message-----
From: HistoNet Server <HistoNet@Pathology.swmed.edu>
To: HistoNet Server <HistoNet@pathology.swmed.edu>
Date: Sunday, October 11, 1998 1:03 AM
Subject: Daily Digest


>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 00:48:05 -0500
>From: "J. A. Kiernan" <jkiernan@julian.uwo.ca>
>Subject: Re: Your failed attempted histonet defection
>
>
>On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, C***y H*******n wrote:
>
>> unsubscribe
>
> The usual slip is to spell it wrongly.
> You got it right but you put it in the wrong place.
>
> The sacred word UNSUBSCRIBE has to go in the Subject line
> of your email. Be careful not to write unsuscribe or
> unscribe or unsusribe, or the other things we see so
> often.
>
> It's an awful word to type, and just one wrong letter
> results in the whole group knowing all about your bungled
> attempt at desertion!
>                        John Kiernan
>                        London, Canada.
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 01:00:08 -0500
>From: "J. A. Kiernan" <jkiernan@julian.uwo.ca>
>Subject: Amyloid can be obscure. Re: congo red
>
>On Fri, 9 Oct 1998, Bryan Llewellyn wrote:
>
>> I have run into this on a few occasions.  It is in the nature of amyloid
to
>> be variable in staining.  If you really must prove its presence, then cut
>> some of the tissue out of the block, dewax it and send it for EM.
Although
>> the ultrastructural morphology will be the pits, the very characteristic
>> structure of amyloid is retained.  We did this on a case a few years ago,
>> when the only stain that demonstrated it was thioflavin T.  It did turn
out
>> to be amyloid.
>                 Bryan Llewellyn
>
>  This is a real HistoNet gem!
>                               John Kiernan
>                               London, further E. in Canada.
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 07:25:49 -0500
>From: "Yvan Lindekens" <yvan.lindekens@skynet.be>
>Subject: Re: "xylene AND alcohol substitude" & "rabbit spleen in
formaldehyde
>37%"
>
>hi all,
>
>ETOH and xylene can be ommitted in the embedding process (paraffin) by the
>use of 2-propanol. This calls for dehydration in 2-propanol at room
>temperature, 2-propanol at 50#161#C, 2-propanol-paraplast mixture (1/1 v/v)
at
>50#161#C and finally, normal embedding in Paraplast.
>
>I use this method all the time (histology and plant anatomy); It works very
>well... I have tried it with several other paraffin's (Paraplast-plus,
>"paraffin fur die histologie", Merck and even with a mixture of household
>paraffin, mp. 52#161#C  and purified biewax (95/5 w/w). The results were
OK,
>sometimes even better compared to the results obtained by "classical
>techniques". Cutting artefacts are far less, due to the abcense of the
>hardening effect of xylene (benzene, toluene)...
>(sections 4-12um, RT= 16#161#C, with manualy operated rotary microtome and
>c-type knive: as an amateur, I don't believe in disposable blades: grinding
>and polishing knives is part of the fun).
>
>One drawback: dehydration trough 2-propanol is slower than dehydration
>trough ETOH...
>
>The method is described in Bock, P.: "Romeis' Mikroskopische Technik",
>1989, Urban&Schwarzenberg, ISBN: 3-541-11227-1.
>
>It's a modification of an old technique (Dietrich, 1929; Doxtader, 1948)
>and I think (but I'm not sure) that even Bolles Lee mentioned it in one of
>the first editions of "The Microtomist's vademecum"... (If my dear friend x
>would be so kind to, finally, return my copy? Thanks).
>___________________________________________________________
>There was a messages about rabbit spleen, "par accident" fixed in
>formaldehyde 37% (Mrs. Mary Kay Olson). Embarrasing (know it, been
>there...).
>
>Perhaps you could give the 2-propanol-paraplast technique a try instead of
>a regular ETOH-xylene-parrafin run: tissue hardening will be less and
>perhaps it will be possible to cut usable sections... Cutting on a sliding
>microtome (instead of a rotary-) could help too...
>
>Mr. Paul Millikin said in his response: "...spleens are VERY hard to fix
>WELL... ...They tend to be so full of RBC that they behave like a thrombus
>or an embolus... When simply thrown intact into an immersion fixative, the
>outer, subcapsular 2-3 mm tends to fix, but the rest is usually rotten...
>... We've been looking at rotten, autolyzed tissue for too long...
>...Slicing (breadloafing) the specimen every 2-3 mm before immersion causes
>considerable improvement, and should be a must for everyone interested in
>spleens".
>
>This is certainly true... I always slice spleen (and other hard to fix
>tissues as lung etc...) in slices about 2-3 mm thick. This can easily be
>done with a sharp razor, a long razor blade or a large dissecting knive (no
>scalpel: the blade is too "short"...) and without using pressure.
>Even then, adequate fixation isn't always guaranteed when using NBF... I
>believe it's better to fix in an alcoholic Bouin formulation
>(Duboscq-Brasil, Lang, Rossman...)(depending on the purpose of the
>preparations).
>I know that there are conflicting opinions regarding the fixation of spleen
>in Bouin, but if I have to choose between techniques that "are not generaly
>accepted" and making slides of "rotten, autolyzed tissue"...
>
>Yvan Lindekens.
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 10:42:32 -0500
>From: "Alexander Nader" <anader@teleweb.at>
>Subject: Re: Mercury poisoning tissue stain?
>
>On Thu, 08 Oct 1998 19:00:13 -0700, A. Mark Briones wrote:
>
>>Has anyone been able to demonstrate tissue deposition in acute, possibly
>>chronic mercury poisoning cases? Does anyone have a good tissue stain for
>>mercury deposits, our pathologist would like to demonstrate deposition if
it
>>can be stained? Kidney? Liver? Brain?  Are there any tissues in anyone's
>>"banks" that has demonstrated positive mercury staining so I could
validate
>>any finding on this unfortunate case?  Thanks.
>
>what about back-scattered electron imgaging? We do this as element analysis
to
>show the content of Ca,
>Fluor in bone. I' ll ask my REM technician on monday if it is possible with
>mercury too.
>
>
>
>
> Dr. Alexander Nader
>            Rossauer Laende 35a/32
>      A-1090 WIEN
>
>    anader@teleweb.at
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 13:17:59 -0500
>From: Priscilla <pdelvent@wyoming.com>
>Subject: Charges for multiple tissues
>
>Hi everyone in Histo Land--We are having a discussion about making a
>special charge for specimens that arrive in multiple for processing.
>Things like more than one skin specimen, colon bxs, prostate needle bxs,
>etc.  In the past I have always had a charge of XXX multiple where I lower
>the price of the single specimen and then times it the number of specimens
>that have been removed and called it skin multiple or prostate multiple or
>colon multiple.  These would all be submitted in separate containers and
>thusly separate cassettes.  The colon bxs especially can amount to more
>dollars charge than to remove the whole colon if the single specimen charge
>would be multiplied times the number of sites bxs.
>
>How do you handle these charges?
>
>Also in researching these charges by calling other hospitals, I came across
>another interesting method of charging.  I have found where even if a
>bilateral specimen such as vas deferens or fallopian tubes were submitted
>in the same container  (Yes, I too, hope that there is a suture on the
>right sided specimen to denote which it is) that the charge was x two even
>though it was submitted in the same container.  Interestingly enough, I
>have always submitted only one charge for a bilateral fallopian tube or vas
>deferens, even if they were submitted in separate containers (which I hope
>they were)
>
>Also in the case of uterus, fallopian tubes and ovaries, I found where
>there were three charges even though the specimen was submitted in one
>container.  For Tonsils and Adenoids, I found places charging 3 charges for
>this type of specimen.  I have always charged only one charge for either
>both tonsils or tonsils and adenoids.
>
>Either I have been very stupid or just not up to date on charging
>practices.  I'm sure our patients hope that I don't become too informed as
>changing the way I've been charging will make a big impact on our customers
>bills.
>
>Does any one know of rules for this?  I always thought that anything sent
>down in a separate container needed a separate charge, except in the case
>of bilateral specimens such as those mentioned above, and I thought that
>T&A's were submitted separately just so the specimen could be identified as
>to the proper side,  I also thought that UTO's were considered one
>specimen.  I can see where a uterus sent separately from the ovaries could
>justify a separate charge, especially if one ovary was possibly neoplastic
>or the uterus was and the ovaries benign.  Of course we don't know until
>the microscopic, do we?
>
>I look forward to being enlightened by this group.  Please be kind to me!!
>I'm usually on top of these things, but coding workshops usually are for
>the total billing and I don't get sent to them if they don't concentrate on
>just Pathology.
>
>Priscilla in Central Wyoming
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 16:21:17 -0500
>From: Michelle McCafferty <mmccaff@mbl.edu>
>Subject: Thank you
>
>
> Thank you to every one who explained what the Red Green Show is
>all about.  Boston area PBS doesn't have it listed on Saturday night so I
>guess I'll have to check the other nights of the week.  Perhaps Boston
>isn't broadcasting the show at all!  Sounds like that would be a pity.
>
> Michelle
>
>
>
>Michelle McCafferty
>Marine Biological Laboratory
>7 MBL Street
>Woods Hole, MA 02543-1015
>
>
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Date: 10 Oct 1998 18:01:00 -0500
>From: swansong <swansong@videotron.ca>
>Subject: Re: subscribe digest
>
>
>- -----Original Message-----
>From: HistoNet Server <HistoNet@Pathology.swmed.edu>
>To: swansong <swansong@videotron.ca>
>Date: Friday, October 09, 1998 7:42 PM
>
>
>>Please do not send ENCLOSURES!!!!!!
>>
>
>
>
>Here are the messages received yesterday!
>