4.3 Article

Confocal mosaicing microscopy in skin excisions: a demonstration of rapid surgical pathology

期刊

JOURNAL OF MICROSCOPY
卷 233, 期 1, 页码 149-159

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2818.2008.03105.x

关键词

Acetowhitening; basal cell carcinomas; confocal microscopy; Mohs surgery; mosaicing

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01EB002715]
  2. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (Program Officer Dr. John Haller)
  3. Byrne Fund (Department of Medicine at MSKCC)
  4. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [P30CA008748] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  5. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING [R01EB002715] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Precise micro-surgical removal of tumour with minimal damage to the surrounding normal tissue requires a series of excisions, each guided by an examination of frozen histology of the previous. An example is Mohs surgery for the removal of basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) in skin. The preparation of frozen histology is labour-intensive and slow. Confocal microscopy may enable rapid detection of tumours directly in surgical excisions with minimal need for frozen histology. Mosaicing of images enables observation of nuclear and cellular morphology in large areas of surgically excised tissue. In skin, the use of 10-1% acetic acid as a reflectance contrast agent brightens nuclei in 0.5-5 min and enhances nuclear-to-dermis contrast and detectability of BCCs. A tissue fixture was engineered for precisely mounting surgical excisions to enable mosaicing of 36 x 36 images to create a field of view of 12 x 12 mm. This large field of view displays the excision at 2x magnification, similar to that routinely used by Mohs surgeons when examining frozen histology. Comparison of mosaics to histology demonstrates detectability of BCCs. Confocal mosaicing presently requires 9 min, instead of 20-45 min per excision for preparing frozen histology, and thus may provide a means for rapid pathology-at-the-bedside to expedite and guide surgery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据