Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Shidham, V.B. et al.

Shidham, Chang, Rao, Komorowski, Chivukula,

Immunostaining of cytology smears: a comparative study to identify the most suitable method of smear preparation and fixation with reference to commonly used immunomarkers.

As an extension of our previous study (Shidham et al., Acta Cytol 2000;44:1015-1022), we evaluated the interference by methods of cytology smear preparation on the immunoreactivity of cytokeratin-7, cytokeratin-20, estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, chromogranin, synaptophysin, and vimentin. Scrape cytology smears of 34 fresh specimens submitted for intraoperative consultation were studied. They were processed by three different methods--A: wet-fixed in 95% ethanol; B: air-dried saline rehydrated smears fixed in alcoholic formalin; and C: air-dried saline rehydrated smears fixed in 95% ethanol with 5% acetic acid. The intensity scores of immunostaining were estimated semiquantitatively and compared with corresponding formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue sections (FPTS). Except vimentin, all immunomarkers showed higher intensity scores with method A or B than with method C. Vimentin showed the best results with method A. Our results indicate that the immunoreactivity pattern with each immunomarker is affected by the method of cytology smear processing. Most importantly, method C, which is the desired choice for cytomorphological staining, was not suitable for immunostaining.[1]

References

Immunostaining of cytology smears: a comparative study to identify the most suitable method of smear preparation and fixation with reference to commonly used immunomarkers. Shidham, V.B., Chang, C.C., Rao, R.N., Komorowski, R., Chivukula, M. Diagn. Cytopathol. (2003) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.