Thu, Aug 21, 2025
1- Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry
2- Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry ,sree.path177@gmail.com
2- Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research (JIPMER), Puducherry ,
Abstract: (425 Views)
Background and objectives: Conventional tissue processing (CTP) is the gold standard method for tissue processing but the method is relatively time-consuming. Microwave tissue processing reduces the turn- around time (TAT) and gives comparable histomorphology as conventional tissue processing. The objective was to compare the laboratory grade microwave (LMP) and domestic microwave tissue processing (DMP) with conventional tissue processing (CTP) in terms of histomorphology and Immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining.
Methods: Three tissue bits from 89 formalin fixed resection specimens were processed by CTP, LMP and DMP processing methods and stained with H&E staining. In subgroup analysis, IHC was done on 17 relevant cases using two antibodies Ki67 (nuclear) and Pancytokeratin (membranous and cytoplasmic). Parameters like clarity of section, cytoplasmic details, nuclear details, colour intensity and interface of epithelium and connective tissue were studied. Parameters like colour intensity, localisation of antigen, background staining and crispness of staining were studied on IHC. The results were analyzed by using Kappa statistics.
Results: There was a fair to moderate agreement between the conventional tissue processing and laboratory microwave tissue processing. There was a slight to fair agreement between the conventional tissue processing to domestic microwave tissue processing and laboratory microwave processing to domestic microwave processing.
Conclusion: Microwave tissue processing reduced the turnaround time The overall quality of laboratory microwave processed tissue was better than domestic microwave processing and is equally good as that of conventional tissue processing.
Methods: Three tissue bits from 89 formalin fixed resection specimens were processed by CTP, LMP and DMP processing methods and stained with H&E staining. In subgroup analysis, IHC was done on 17 relevant cases using two antibodies Ki67 (nuclear) and Pancytokeratin (membranous and cytoplasmic). Parameters like clarity of section, cytoplasmic details, nuclear details, colour intensity and interface of epithelium and connective tissue were studied. Parameters like colour intensity, localisation of antigen, background staining and crispness of staining were studied on IHC. The results were analyzed by using Kappa statistics.
Results: There was a fair to moderate agreement between the conventional tissue processing and laboratory microwave tissue processing. There was a slight to fair agreement between the conventional tissue processing to domestic microwave tissue processing and laboratory microwave processing to domestic microwave processing.
Conclusion: Microwave tissue processing reduced the turnaround time The overall quality of laboratory microwave processed tissue was better than domestic microwave processing and is equally good as that of conventional tissue processing.
Research Article: Original Paper |
Subject:
Laboratory Sciences
Received: 2023/06/6 | Accepted: 2024/05/20
Received: 2023/06/6 | Accepted: 2024/05/20
References
1. Amrutha N, Patil S, Rao RS. Microwaves: a revolution in histoprocessing. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2014:15(2);149-52. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
2. Tosuner Z, Karaer O, İnce Ü. Lean Six Sigma Applications in a Multicenter Pathology Laboratory: An Industrial Pathology Model. Research. 2023:4(55). [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
3. Mathai AM, Naik R, Pai MR, Rai S, Baliga P. Microwave histoprocessing versus conventional histoprocessing. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 2008; 51(1):12-6. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
4. Chandy D, Swetha D'Souza P, Jeyalyn David S. Tissue Processing using Microwave Oven: A Boon for Histology Slide Preparation. International Journal of Anatomy and Research. 2024;12(2):8903-09. [View at Publisher] [DOI]
5. Patil S, Rao RS, Nagaraja A, Kumar SD. Comparison of conventional and microwave histo-processing of various oral soft tissue specimens. Journal of Dental Research and Review. 2014;1(1):3-6. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6. Rao M, Pai SM, Khanagar SB, Siddeeqh S, Devang DD, Naik S. Microwave-assisted tissue processing, fixation and staining in tissues of different thicknesses: A comparative study. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2020;24(1):186. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
7. Bhuvanamha devi R, Subhasree AR, Parameaswari PJ, Parijatham BO . Domestic microwave versus conventional tissue processing: A quantitative and qualitative analysis. J Clin Diagn Res. 2013;7(5):835-39. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
8. Shrestha G, Karki S, Pradhan A. Changing perspective on tissue processing-comparison of microwave histoprocessing method with the conventional method. Journal of Pathology of Nepal. 2015;5(10):841-6. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9. Rohr LR, Layfield LJ, Wallin D, Hardy D. A comparison of routine and rapid microwave tissue processing in a surgical pathology laboratory: quality of histologic sections and advantages of microwave processing. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;115(5):703-8. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
10. Emerson LL, Tripp SR, Baird BC, Layfield LJ, Rohr LR. A comparison of immunohistochemical stain quality in conventional and rapid microwave processed tissues. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006;125(2):176-83. [View at Publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Enamad
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.