Preservation of Histology by Phenol-Based Fixative: Mini Review of Recent Findings

Rahman, S M Niazur; Alam, Tanbira; Alam, Nazmun Nahar

doi:10.4067/s0717-95022021000100050

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We were expecting that the SSS and AFS-fixed brains would be difficult to manipulate (softer tissue), according to our previous study in mice (Frigon et al, 2022). Accordingly, recent study in rat brains (Martins-Costa et al, 2022), and human anatomical studies describe these fixatives as soft-embalming solutions, which could led to differences in the texture of the brains (Balta et al, 2015; Eltoum et al, 2001; Hammer et al, 2012; Hayashi et al, 2014; Hopwood et al, 1989; Nicholson et al, 2005; Rahman et al, 2021; Tomalty et al, 2019). The human tissue samples were relatively stiff and well-fixed macroscopically, and we found mostly that sections from AFS fixed specimens were easy to manipulate, and slightly more difficult in cases fixed with SSS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is known that alcohol solutions might be optimal for combining gross anatomy dissection, surgical training and histology assessment of different tissues (Barton et al, 2009; Benet et al, 2014; Hopwood et al, 1989; Martins-Costa et al, 2022; O’Sullivan & Mitchell, 1993; Rahman et al, 2021; Tomalty et al, 2019; Venne et al, 2020). In this work, we have extensively assessed our specific solution, as it differed, although slightly, from the other formulas that are used worldwide (Barton et al, 2009; Benet et al, 2014; Cabrera et al, 2017; Hopwood et al, 1989; Martins-Costa et al, 2022; O’Sullivan & Mitchell, 1993; Rahman et al, 2021; Shetty et al, 2020; Tomalty et al, 2019; Venne et al, 2020). To our knowledge, no brain histology quality and antigenicity preservation assessments are available in the literature for such solutions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, to our knowledge, there are no studies on the ability of these solutions to preserve brain tissue adequately for (immuno)-histochemistry procedures. Instead, previous studies have focused on MRI (Benet et al, 2014; Kanawaku et al, 2014; Maranzano et al, 2020; Nazemorroaya et al, 2022; Schramek et al, 2013), other organs (Cabrera et al, 2017; Hammer et al, 2012; Hopwood et al, 1989; Lombardero et al, 2017; Rahman et al, 2021), or solutions with different chemical compositions than the SSS and the AFS currently employed by our laboratory (Hammer et al, 2012; Rahman et al, 2021; Tomalty et al, 2019). Therefore, these studies were limited with regards to information on tissue quality and antigen preservation in brain specimens fixed with such solutions, which is crucial to decide whether these brains are suitable for neuroscientific research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of histological procedures and antigenicity of human post-mortem brains fixed with solutions used in gross anatomy laboratories

Frigon,

Gérin-Lajoie,

Dadar

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Brain banks provide small tissue samples to researchers, while gross anatomy laboratories could provide larger samples, including complete brains to neuroscientists. However, they are preserved with solutions appropriate for gross-dissection, different from the classic neutral-buffered formalin (NBF) used in brain banks. Our previous work in mice showed that two gross-anatomy laboratory solutions, a saturated-salt-solution (SSS) and an alcohol-formaldehyde-solution (AFS), preserve antigenicity of the main cellular markers. Our goal is now to compare the quality of histology and antigenicity preservation of human brains fixed with NBF by immersion (practice of brain banks) vs. those fixed with a SSS and an AFS by whole body perfusion, practice of gross-anatomy laboratories. Methods: We used a convenience sample of 42 brains (31 males, 11 females; 25-90 years old) fixed with NBF (N=12), SSS (N=13), and AFS (N=17). One cm3 tissue blocks were cut, cryoprotected, frozen and sliced into 40 um sections. The four cell populations were labeled using immunohistochemistry (neuronal-nuclei (NeuN), glial-fibrillary-acidic-protein (GFAP), ionized-calcium-binding-adaptor-molecule1 (Iba1) and myelin-proteolipid-protein (PLP)). We qualitatively assessed antigenicity and cell distribution, and compared the ease of manipulation of the sections, the microscopic tissue quality, and the quality of common histochemical stains (e.g., Cresyl violet, Luxol fast blue, etc.) across solutions. Results: Sections of SSS-fixed brains were more difficult to manipulate and showed poorer tissue quality than those from brains fixed with the other solutions. The four antigens were preserved, and cell labeling was more often homogenous in AFS-fixed specimens. NeuN and GFAP were not always present in the NBF and SSS samples. Some antigens were heterogeneously distributed in some specimens, independently of the fixative, but an antigen retrieval protocol successfully recovered them. Finally, the histochemical stains were of sufficient quality regardless of the fixative, although neurons were more often paler in SSS-fixed specimens. Conclusion: Antigenicity was preserved in human brains fixed with solutions used in human gross-anatomy (albeit the poorer quality of SSS-fixed specimens). For some specific variables, histology quality was superior in AFS-fixed brains. Furthermore, we show the feasibility of frequently used histochemical stains. These results are promising for neuroscientists interested in using brain specimens from anatomy laboratories.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of histological procedures and antigenicity of human post-mortem brains fixed with solutions used in gross anatomy laboratories

Frigon,

Gérin-Lajoie,

Dadar

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, to our knowledge, there are no studies on the ability of these solutions to preserve brain tissue adequately for (immuno)-histochemistry procedures. Instead, previous studies have focused on MRI ( Schramek et al, 2013 ; Benet et al, 2014 ; Kanawaku et al, 2014 ; Maranzano et al, 2020 ; Nazemorroaya et al, 2022 ), other organs ( Hopwood et al, 1989 ; Hammer et al, 2012 ; Cabrera et al, 2017 ; Lombardero et al, 2017 ; Rahman et al, 2021 ), or solutions with different chemical compositions than the SSS and the AFS currently employed by our laboratory ( Hammer et al, 2012 ; Tomalty et al, 2019 ; Rahman et al, 2021 ). Therefore, these studies were limited with regards to information on tissue quality and antigen preservation in brain specimens fixed with such solutions, which is crucial to decide whether these brains are suitable for neuroscientific research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of histological procedures and antigenicity of human post-mortem brains fixed with solutions used in gross anatomy laboratories

Frigon,

Gérin-Lajoie,

Dadar

et al. 2024

Front. Neuroanat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBrain banks provide small tissue samples to researchers, while gross anatomy laboratories could provide larger samples, including complete brains to neuroscientists. However, they are preserved with solutions appropriate for gross-dissection, different from the classic neutral-buffered formalin (NBF) used in brain banks. Our previous work in mice showed that two gross-anatomy laboratory solutions, a saturated-salt-solution (SSS) and an alcohol-formaldehyde-solution (AFS), preserve antigenicity of the main cellular markers (neurons, astrocytes, microglia, and myelin). Our goal is now to compare the quality of histology and antigenicity preservation of human brains fixed with NBF by immersion (practice of brain banks) vs. those fixed with a SSS and an AFS by whole body perfusion, practice of gross-anatomy laboratories.MethodsWe used a convenience sample of 42 brains (31 males, 11 females; 25–90 years old) fixed with NBF (N = 12), SSS (N = 13), and AFS (N = 17). One cm3 tissue blocks were cut, cryoprotected, frozen and sliced into 40 μm sections. The four cell populations were labeled using immunohistochemistry (Neurons = neuronal-nuclei = NeuN, astrocytes = glial-fibrillary-acidic-protein = GFAP, microglia = ionized-calcium-binding-adaptor-molecule1 = Iba1 and oligodendrocytes = myelin-proteolipid-protein = PLP). We qualitatively assessed antigenicity and cell distribution, and compared the ease of manipulation of the sections, the microscopic tissue quality, and the quality of common histochemical stains (e.g., Cresyl violet, Luxol fast blue, etc.) across solutions.ResultsSections of SSS-fixed brains were more difficult to manipulate and showed poorer tissue quality than those from brains fixed with the other solutions. The four antigens were preserved, and cell labeling was more often homogeneous in AFS-fixed specimens. NeuN and GFAP were not always present in NBF and SSS samples. Some antigens were heterogeneously distributed in some specimens, independently of the fixative, but an antigen retrieval protocol successfully recovered them. Finally, the histochemical stains were of sufficient quality regardless of the fixative, although neurons were more often paler in SSS-fixed specimens.ConclusionAntigenicity was preserved in human brains fixed with solutions used in human gross-anatomy (albeit the poorer quality of SSS-fixed specimens). For some specific variables, histology quality was superior in AFS-fixed brains. Furthermore, we show the feasibility of frequently used histochemical stains. These results are promising for neuroscientists interested in using brain specimens from anatomy laboratories.

show abstract

“…Various processes that have been used in the past and using formalin and ethanol for preservation are still popular because of the simplicity and product availability (Shian et al, 2016). Phenolbased ixative has also been reported as an alterna-tive to formalin (Rahman et al, 2021). Yet, plastination has changed the path of human tissue preservation, as, by this procedure, we can get real-like specimens (Hagens et al, 1987).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preservation of human tissue by plastination: An anatomical perspective

Farhat¹,

Alam²,

Rahman³

2021

ijrps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The necessity of preserving human tissue has increased over the years because of various reasons. Preserved tissues play a crucial part in the teaching and research of anatomy. This review paper has compiled the basic techniques of human tissue plastination from the anatomical perspective and its advantages over typical methods. One of the most effective techniques we used to preserve human tissue is plastination. It was developed by German anatomist Dr. Gunther Von Hagens. After him, many improvements are made to get maximum results. Because of this technique's advancement, we can see an accurate 3-D sample of human tissue, which is anatomically correct and looks almost real. There are essential procedures for all types of plastination like fixation, dehydration, defatting, force impregnation, positioning, and hardening. Silicone, epoxy, and polyester are primarily used as the polymer. Acetone is used for dehydration. Removal of fat is crucial for tissue preservation by plastination. Plastinated specimens are used in laboratories for teaching anatomy, in research institutes for morphological studies, and also in forensic to solve crimes. After analyzing several research articles, it was concluded that plastination has much more advantages than other human tissue preservation techniques for anatomical usages.

show abstract

Preservation of Histology by Phenol-Based Fixative: Mini Review of Recent Findings

Cited by 3 publications

References 12 publications

Comparison of histological procedures and antigenicity of human post-mortem brains fixed with solutions used in gross anatomy laboratories

Comparison of histological procedures and antigenicity of human post-mortem brains fixed with solutions used in gross anatomy laboratories

Comparison of histological procedures and antigenicity of human post-mortem brains fixed with solutions used in gross anatomy laboratories

Preservation of human tissue by plastination: An anatomical perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About