Re: [Histonet] formalin substitutes. HELP

2012-11-09 Thread Rene J Buesa
Nieves:
NO formalin substitute will work in the same way as formalin and the solution 
is not to start testing other "substitutes" that will make your life miserable 
and your sections and staining procedures of sub-standard quality.
The solution is:
1- to use LESS amounts of formalin (a 5:1 volume is more than enough);
2- have a well ventilated area;
3- do NOT prepare your own buffered formalin; buy pre-filled sample bottles; and
4- never handle formalin more than absolutely necessary.
Under separate cover I am sending you 2 articles I wrote on this subject
René J.



From: Nieves Gomez 
To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu 
Sent: Friday, November 9, 2012 8:55 AM
Subject: [Histonet] formalin substitutes. HELP

Dear Histonetters,

I'm new in the net. I work as Pathologist in a Vet Lab in Spain.

Because formalin is toxic our Lab is for the practice of using
alternative fixatives. I think the main viable alternative is glyoxal
based formulas, but I have so many questions that Commercials don't know
or don't want to answer me. For example, have a MSDS or is it
accessible? Really is less hazardous than formalin or just is not
checked? (the advantages and desadvantages of formalin are known for at
least 100 years). Related to this, I think the glyoxal is suggested as a
formalin substitute in an article in 1940's and now it is sold as a "new
product" and most of the products are sold as "green", "no-toxic" or
"non harmful". In my opinion, a fixative can not be "non-toxic" if you
want it fixed tissues. 

Another question is the time needed to fix tissues or the ratio volume
specimen/fixative. To the first point, I have read an article that
mentions there is mould growth in specimens over time. Are we changing a
"chemical risk" to a "biological risk"? In my lab we have a specifically
workstation for the gross examination and sectioning of specimens, and
we wear all the Personal Protective Equipment needed (formalin chemical
filters, gloves, googles...) that minimizes the risk (the chemical risk
not the biological risk).  It is believed that formalin given time will
kill any microorganisms (or spores) present in tissues, mycobacteria
also.. what about these new products? Are they germicidal?

I do not get to appreciate the morfological changes (nuclear changes,
lysis of erithrocites, eosinophilia...) because they are well
documented. My aim is to know if there is any Lab that works with any
formalin substitute routinely to aks these questions. Please, help me.

Thanks and have a nice weekend


Nieves Gomez
Veterinary Pathologist
Animal Health Department
NEIKER-Tecnalia 
Berreaga, 1.
48160 Derio. Bizkaia. Spain.
ngo...@neiker.net

___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


RE: [Histonet] Formalin substitutes, anyone?

2010-08-03 Thread Tony Henwood
Hi Michael


No we do not use formalin substitutes

Regards

Tony Henwood JP, MSc, BAppSc, GradDipSysAnalys, CT(ASC)
Laboratory Manager & Senior Scientist
Tel: 612 9845 3306
Fax: 612 9845 3318
the children's hospital at westmead 
Cnr Hawkesbury Road and Hainsworth Street, Westmead 
Locked Bag 4001, Westmead NSW 2145, AUSTRALIA 



I am curious!! In a Histonet message last week, Tony Henwood mentioned
the formalin substitutes "UMfix", "Kryofix" (now called Neo-fix I think)
and "Spuitfix". 

1) How many  surgical pathology labs use formalin substitutes for
routine work? 
2) Which ones do they use? (which is the most popular?)
3) Do they use formalin substitutes just for initial fixation, or on
their tissue processors as well?

I would be interested in hearing. Yes, I know, curiosity killed the
cat!! Thank you to anyone who replies. Histotechnology is endlessly
fascinating.

Michael Titford
Pathology USA
Mobile AL USA


=
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet

*
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender.

Views expressed in this message and any attachments are those of the individual 
sender, and are not necessarily the views of The Children's Hospital at Westmead

This note also confirms that this email message has been virus scanned and 
although no computer viruses were detected, The Childrens Hospital at Westmead 
accepts no liability for any consequential damage resulting from email 
containing computer viruses.
*

___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet


RE: [Histonet] Formalin substitutes

2010-07-27 Thread Tony Henwood
The following info might be useful:

It is believed that formalin given time will kill any microorganisms
that are present in tissue and that formalin will inactivate
tuberculosis.

Vardaxis et al (J Clin Pathol 1997;50:429-433) were quite rightly
concerned with the disinfection of bacterial endospores. Endospores can
survive the most adverse chemical and physical environments and can
cause such diseases as tetanus, anthrax, gas gangrene and botulism. 

They used autoclave spore containing test strips and fixed them in
various fixatives such as 10% neutral buffered formalin, ethanol in
various concentrations (70% & 50%) and two commercial non-formalin
fixatives (Kryofix & Spuitfix). Fixation times varied from 24 hours to
14 days.

They found that 10% formalin killed all microbes within 24 hours, where
as only one non-formalin fixative (Spuitfix) killed the spores and this
was only after 7 days fixation. Microwave fixation also did not kill the
spores.

These workers did note that spore strips do not behave like tissue and
that tissue may have a protective effect on pathogens.

Cleary et al (J Clin Pathol 2005;58:22-25) studied the antimicrobial
effects of UMFix, an alcohol based tissue fixative, on various
microorganisms. The UMFix solution was compared with 10% neutral
buffered formalin.

After a short exposure, UMFix rapidly killed vegetative bacteria,
yeasts, moulds, and viruses. Bacterial spores were resistant to killing
by UMFix. All organisms were killed by the 10% neutral buffered formalin
preparation.
They concluded that UMFix was microbicidal for vegetative bacteria,
yeasts, and aspergillus species after a short exposure, although it was
not active against spore forming bacillus species. The methanol content
of the fixative was responsible for the killing effect of this fixative.
No killing was seen when polyethylene glycol was used alone.

Kappel et al (HUM PATHOL 27:1361--1364, 1996) attempted to grow TB from
formalin fixed lung tissue that had previously been shown to be positive
by sputum culture. They were unable to culture TB from these tissues.

Gerston et al (HUM PATHOL 35:571-575.2004) in South Africa analysed 138
formalin fixed lungs with histological evidence of AFB and were able to
culture TB from 12 of these cases (one of these cases had been fixed for
80 days before being tested).

Gerston et al suggest that there is a risk of contracting tuberculosis
from tissue that has been fixed in formalin, if aerosols or accidental
inoculation should occur. 

Trimming and sectioning wax blocks are of concern but no studies have
been done yet.

Of concern to histotechnolgists are:
1.  Tissue with Inflammation-induced Encapsulation may protect bugs
from formalin.
2.  Formalin dilutes as it penetrates tissue.
3.  Formalin substitutes may not be germicidal.

Regards

Tony Henwood JP, MSc, BAppSc, GradDipSysAnalys, CT(ASC)
Laboratory Manager & Senior Scientist
Tel: 612 9845 3306
Fax: 612 9845 3318
the children's hospital at westmead 
Cnr Hawkesbury Road and Hainsworth Street, Westmead 
Locked Bag 4001, Westmead NSW 2145, AUSTRALIA 




-Original Message-
From: histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
[mailto:histonet-boun...@lists.utsouthwestern.edu] On Behalf Of Weaver,
Colin
Sent: Saturday, 24 July 2010 2:15 AM
To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Subject: [Histonet] Formalin substitutes


Hi everyone - does anyone know how effective these formalin substitutes
are at killing microorgansms9esp HG3) in the tissue fixed? I know that
Finefix states that because of the alcohol content being over 70% that
it is effective against many micro-organisms but info seems scarce on
the others

 

Thanks and have a nice weekend

 

Colin Weaver

Histology lab manager

VLA

Thirsk

North Yorkshire

UK

Veterinary Laboratories Agency (VLA)This email and any
attachments is intended for the namedrecipient only.If you have
received it in error you have no authority to use,disclose, store or
copy any of its contents and you should destroyit and inform the
sender. Whilst this email and associated attachments will have
beenchecked for known viruses whilst within VLA systems we
canaccept no responsibility once it has left our
systems.Communications on VLA's computer systems may be
monitoredand/or recorded to secure the effective operation of the
systemand for other lawful purposes.
___
Histonet mailing list
Histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu
http://lists.utsouthwestern.edu/mailman/listinfo/histonet

*
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender.

Views expressed in this message and any attachments are those of the individual 
sender, and are not necessarily the views of The Children's Hospital at