ArticleJournal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR2013
Comparison of routine fixation of tissues with rapid tissue fixation.
Article in Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microwave-Based Rapid Tissue Processing Technique: A Novel Aid in Histopathologic Laboratory.Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2021Article
- Comparison of routine and microwave-assisted decalcification of bone with or without teeth: A histologic study.Dental research journalArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionConventional formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue provides superior cellular morphology and long-term storage. Problems with formalin fixation comprise delay of fixation and variations in the duration of fixation. Microwave assisted tissue fixation removes the use of noxious and potentially toxic formalin that decreases the turnaround time and creates a personnel friendly workflow. MATERIAL AND
methodsThe present study was conducted over a period of two years. One hundred and forty paired tissue sections were taken including both neoplastic and non-neoplastic tissues. One of the paired tissues was fixed in formalin and the other was fixed by using microwave irradiation in phosphate buffered saline. Both were then processed by conventional method. Each slide was examined and rated for the adequacy of fixation by two pathologists in a blinded fashion using 7 parameters: Cellular outline, cytoplasmic detail, nuclear detail, erythrocyte integrity, lymphocyte appearance, overall morphology and overall staining.
resultsStatistical analysis showed that sections obtained from microwave fixed tissues were comparable to that of routinely fixed tissue. The p-values of all parameters were not significant except for the overall morphology for which p-value was significant owing to loss of tissue in some cases.
conclusionMicrowave irradiation substantially shortened the time from specimen reception to diagnosis (turnaround time) and allowed same-day tissue processing and diagnosis of specimens without compromising the overall quality of the histologic section.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.