Cited by 60Molecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsUltrasound and Hyperthermia ApplicationsMicrobial Inactivation Methods

Ultrasound-accelerated formalin fixation of tissue improves morphology, antigen and mRNA preservation

Open access
Chu, Wei-Sing, Furusato, Bungo, Wong, Kondi, Sesterhenn, Isabell A, Mostofi, Fathollah K, Wei, Min Qi, Zhu, Zhenqing, Abbondanzo, Susan L +1 more·2005·Modern Pathology

Abstract

Formalin fixation and paraffin embedding are conventional tissue preservation and processing methods used for histologic diagnosis in over 90% of cases. However, formalin fixation has three disadvantages: (1) slow fixation (16-24 h) hinders intraoperative decision making, (2) slow quenching of enzymatic activity causes RNA degradation, and (3) extensive molecule modification affects protein antigenicity. Applying high-frequency, high-intensity ultrasound to the formalin fixative cuts fixation time to 5-15 min. Fixation of various tissues such as lymph node, brain, breast, and prostate suggests that, compared to the conventional method, implementation of ultrasound retains superior and more uniform tissue morphology preservation. Less protein antigenicity is altered so that rapid immunohistochemical reactions occur with higher sensitivity and intensity, reducing the need for antigen retrieval pretreatment. Better RNA preservation results in stronger signals in in situ hybridization and longer RNA fragments extracted from fixed tissues, probably due to rapid inhibition of endogenous RNase activity. Molecules extracted from ultrasound-fixed tissues are of greater integrity and quantity compared to conventionally fixed tissues, and thus better support downstream molecular analyses. Overall, ultrasound-facilitated tissue preservation can provide rapid and improved morphological and molecular preservation to better accommodate both traditional and molecular diagnoses.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/modpathol.3800354

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chu, W.-S., Furusato, B., Wong, K., Sesterhenn, I. A., Mostofi, F. K., Wei, M. Q., Zhu, Z., Abbondanzo, S. L., & Liang, Q.
Affiliations
  • Bio-Quick (United States) (US)
  • Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (US)
Corresponding author
Chu, Wei-Sing
Venue
Modern Pathology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-06
Volume
18
Issue
6
Pages
850-863
ISSN
0893-3952 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2150418579
Cited by
60
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Modern Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (R21CA091166)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Ultrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Microbial Inactivation Methods
Keywords
formalin fixation, paraffin embedding, tissue preservation, RNA preservation, protein antigenicity, immunohistochemistry, in situ hybridization, tissue morphology
MeSH terms
Antigens, Cell Nucleus, Formaldehyde, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Lung Neoplasms, Male, Prostate, Proteins, RNA, Messenger, Time Factors, Ultrasonics, Blotting, Western, Reproducibility of Results, Tissue Fixation, In Situ Hybridization, Reverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain Reaction, RNA Stability

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review