PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
UNASSIGNED: Cellblock (CB) with immunohistochemistry (IHC) is practically indispensable in the diagnostic workup of serous effusions; however, CB requires a minimum of 15-20 h for routine histopathological processing. A reduction in processing time can expedite a faster diagnosis.
UNASSIGNED: This study was undertaken to evaluate the utility of the heat-induced CB (HICB) technique.
UNASSIGNED: Two sets of agar-embedded CBs were processed from 50 effusion samples. CBs were further processed by conventional and rapid methods. Conventional CBs (CCB) were processed in a histoprocessor, whereas rapid CB was processed in a heated water bath with an agitation facility. For HICB processing, dehydration and clearing were performed at 50°C followed by paraffin wax impregnation at 65°C temperature. From both CBs, sections of 5 um thickness were cut and stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H and E). Cell morphology, cost, and time were compared between the two methods. The feasibility of IHC was attempted in a few cases.
UNASSIGNED: HICB was completed within 4.30 h compared with CCB. Diagnoses on both CBs were concordant in all the cases. Incomplete dehydration was noted in six (12%) cases, but the diagnosis was not compromised. No additional cost was involved in HICB. On IHC, both HICB and CCB exhibited equivalent expression.
UNASSIGNED: HICB is a rapid, innovative, simple, and cost-effective technique and expedites faster diagnosis. It does not require any advanced equipment.
UNASSIGNED: This study was undertaken to evaluate the utility of the heat-induced CB (HICB) technique.
UNASSIGNED: Two sets of agar-embedded CBs were processed from 50 effusion samples. CBs were further processed by conventional and rapid methods. Conventional CBs (CCB) were processed in a histoprocessor, whereas rapid CB was processed in a heated water bath with an agitation facility. For HICB processing, dehydration and clearing were performed at 50°C followed by paraffin wax impregnation at 65°C temperature. From both CBs, sections of 5 um thickness were cut and stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H and E). Cell morphology, cost, and time were compared between the two methods. The feasibility of IHC was attempted in a few cases.
UNASSIGNED: HICB was completed within 4.30 h compared with CCB. Diagnoses on both CBs were concordant in all the cases. Incomplete dehydration was noted in six (12%) cases, but the diagnosis was not compromised. No additional cost was involved in HICB. On IHC, both HICB and CCB exhibited equivalent expression.
UNASSIGNED: HICB is a rapid, innovative, simple, and cost-effective technique and expedites faster diagnosis. It does not require any advanced equipment.
摘要：
■免疫组织化学（IHC）的细胞阻滞（CB）在浆液性积液的诊断检查中实际上是必不可少的；但是，CB需要至少15-20小时进行常规组织病理学处理。处理时间的减少可以加快更快的诊断。
■进行这项研究以评估热致CB（HICB）技术的实用性。
■从50个渗出液样品中处理两组琼脂包埋的CB。通过常规和快速方法进一步处理CB。常规CB(CCB)在组织处理器中进行处理，而快速CB是在带有搅拌设备的加热水浴中处理的。对于HICB处理，在50°C下进行脱水和澄清,然后在65°C温度下进行石蜡浸渍。从两个CB中，切取5μm厚的切片并用苏木精和伊红(H和E)染色。细胞形态学,成本,并对两种方法的时间进行了比较。在少数情况下尝试了IHC的可行性。
■与CCB相比，HICB在4.30h内完成。在所有情况下，两个CB的诊断都是一致的。在6例（12％）中发现脱水不完全，但诊断并未受损.HICB不涉及额外费用。在IHC上,HICB和CCB表达相当。
■HICB是一种快速，创新,简单,和具有成本效益的技术，并加快更快的诊断。它不需要任何先进的设备。
■进行这项研究以评估热致CB（HICB）技术的实用性。
■从50个渗出液样品中处理两组琼脂包埋的CB。通过常规和快速方法进一步处理CB。常规CB(CCB)在组织处理器中进行处理，而快速CB是在带有搅拌设备的加热水浴中处理的。对于HICB处理，在50°C下进行脱水和澄清,然后在65°C温度下进行石蜡浸渍。从两个CB中，切取5μm厚的切片并用苏木精和伊红(H和E)染色。细胞形态学,成本,并对两种方法的时间进行了比较。在少数情况下尝试了IHC的可行性。
■与CCB相比，HICB在4.30h内完成。在所有情况下，两个CB的诊断都是一致的。在6例（12％）中发现脱水不完全，但诊断并未受损.HICB不涉及额外费用。在IHC上,HICB和CCB表达相当。
■HICB是一种快速，创新,简单,和具有成本效益的技术，并加快更快的诊断。它不需要任何先进的设备。
