This question comes up every so often and the good news is that there many good to great processors on the market and, like all things, they have their plus and minus issues. Before you decide which processor to purchase, you must first decide what you want the tissue processor to accomplish and identify the two or three most important issues that will most affect your process change. There is a growing trend in Histology to become more efficient/cost effective, reducing TAT and incorporating LEAN process improvement. I whole heartedly suggest you look to improve your process to match this trend and by doing so, you will be lead to rapid tissue processing in a most efficient LEAN way. Couple the previously mentioned trend with the ability to standardize processing for your routine formalin fixed samples and have the ability to process both formalin and molecular fixed samples on the same instrument; I suggest the Sakura Xpress (X50 or X120) rapid processors.
These instruments provide continuous loading, small batch and require a small volume of reagent for processing and then discard. You must address grossing tissue samples to within specification, but that is an issue that you have to address with all tissue processors. A great advantage of incorporating this instrument into your LEAN process is the increased velocity of the workflow as the instruments are continuous load (no cleaning cycle between batches) and small batch (1 to 40 cassettes). Loading 1 or 2 cassettes when a STAT or RUSH cases arrives and completes fixation does not interrupt the process or require special handling. An important factor to consider is that continuous load processing does assist in workload leveling, which will lead to reducing employee stress, increase productivity and error reduction. All these factors contribute directly to reducing TAT. Add the often overlooked advantage of removing Xylene from your tissue processing, and again, I suggest you consider the Xpress. I was an early adopter (5+ yrs. use) and continue to use the X120 (2 units). I have not experienced any instrument performance or maintenance issues and we have never over processed tissues or incorrectly processed tissue samples. There is no other instrument that can facilitate processing in small batch or provide the continuous delivery of cassettes. You can do rapid processing with all of the instruments you are considering, but conventional, one reaction chamber instruments will limit the number of processing runs per day and that will lead to increased batch size. If you have interest or questions, feel free to contact me directly. I would be more than happy to share my experience with conventional, microwave and rapid tissue processing. William DeSalvo, B.S. HTL (ASCP) > From: karla.sendelb...@thedacare.org > To: histonet@lists.utsouthwestern.edu > Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 12:44:02 -0500 > Subject: [Histonet] to microwave or not to microwave > > We are evaluating rapid tissue processing instruments. I would appreciate any > comments about microwave tissue process and rapid non microwave tissue > process. Peloris II, STP 420ES and Milestone Pathos come to mind. Also, is > there anyone who switched from microwave processing to rapid non microwave > tissue processing? > Thank you, > Dr. Sendelbach > Appleton Medical Center > Appleton Wisconsin > 920.738.6294 > _______________________________________________ > 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