Literature DB >> 25452153

Advantages of a combined method of decalcification compared to EDTA.

Vitor Aparecido Castania1, Joáo Walter de Souza da Silveira, Ana Carolina Issy, Dimitrius Leonardo Pitol, Mayara Leite Castania, Abel Dorigan Neto, Elaine Aparecida Del Bel, Helton Luiz Aparecido Defino.   

Abstract

Decalcification of mineralized tissues is an essential step during tissue processing in the routine histopathology. The time required for complete decalcification, and the effect of decalcifier on cellular and tissue morphology are important parameters which influence the selection of decalcifying agents. In this study, we compared a decalcifying solution (ETDA) composed of both acid and chelating agents to a classical and well-known decalcifying agent (EDTA). To this purpose, the optic density of bone radiographs, residual calcium analysis, bone sample weight, and histological and immunohistochemical analysis were performed. Our data suggest that, similarly to EDTA, the ETDA solution completely removes the calcium ions from the samples enabling easy sectioning. However, unlike the EDTA, this agent takes much less time. Furthermore, both agents showed comparable decalcification efficacy, and similarly, they did not produce cellular, tissue or antigenicity impairments. Therefore, ETDA may be a suitable option when it is necessary an association between a rapid and complete removal of calcium minerals, and a suitable preservation of structure and antigenicity of tissues.
© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EDTA; ETDA; bone; decalcification; decalcifying agent; demineralization; rat

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25452153     DOI: 10.1002/jemt.22451

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Microsc Res Tech        ISSN: 1059-910X            Impact factor:   2.769


  6 in total

1.  Comparison of Different Decalcification Methods Using Rat Mandibles as a Model.

Authors:  Flavia M Savi; Gary I Brierly; Jeremy Baldwin; Christina Theodoropoulos; Maria A Woodruff
Journal:  J Histochem Cytochem       Date:  2017-09-29       Impact factor: 2.479

2.  Tissue Morphology and Antigenicity in Mouse and Rat Tibia: Comparing 12 Different Decalcification Conditions.

Authors:  Kristofor Bogoevski; Anna Woloszyk; Keith Blackwood; Maria A Woodruff; Vaida Glatt
Journal:  J Histochem Cytochem       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 2.479

3.  Towards Clinical Translation of In Situ Cartilage Engineering Strategies: Optimizing the Critical Facets of a Cell-Laden Hydrogel Therapy.

Authors:  Serena Duchi; Sam L Francis; Carmine Onofrillo; Cathal D O'Connell; Peter Choong; Claudia Di Bella
Journal:  Tissue Eng Regen Med       Date:  2022-10-16       Impact factor: 4.451

4.  Proposal of an appropriate decalcification method of bone marrow biopsy specimens in the era of expanding genetic molecular study.

Authors:  Sung-Eun Choi; Soon Won Hong; Sun Och Yoon
Journal:  J Pathol Transl Med       Date:  2015-05-15

5.  Comparison of different protocols for demineralization of cortical bone.

Authors:  Siyuan Pang; Frances Y Su; Amesha Green; Justin Salim; Joanna McKittrick; Iwona Jasiuk
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 6.  Analysis of Pre-Analytic Factors Affecting the Success of Clinical Next-Generation Sequencing of Solid Organ Malignancies.

Authors:  Hui Chen; Rajyalakshmi Luthra; Rashmi S Goswami; Rajesh R Singh; Sinchita Roy-Chowdhuri
Journal:  Cancers (Basel)       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 6.639

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.