Actual practices in nephropathology: A survey and comparison with best practices

James M. Pullman, Franco Ferrario, Cynthia C. Nast

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Nephropathology is a specialized field requiring routine tissue evaluation by immunofluorescence (IF), electron microscopy (EM), and light microscopy, and has published standards of best practice. Actual practices are less well documented. We therefore evaluated actual practices in nephropathology and their divergence from best practices. One hundred and twenty Renal Pathology Society members were given questionnaires regarding tissue handling, processing, and staining. Appropriate statistics for each question were calculated from results compiled into Microsoft Excel. Responses from 75 members showed that most received 16 or 18 gauge core biopsies, examined 9 slides for native kidneys, 8 slides for transplant kidneys, and for both used hematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid-Schiff, trichrome, and silver stains. For native kidney biopsies, most collected for IF and EM if tissue was adequate, while clinical input could influence the rest. Almost all performed IF on adequate samples, with a minimum of 8 antibodies, including both light chains, those from Europe sometimes without proof of adequacy. Half performed EM unconditionally, the remainder based on specimen adequacy or clinical input. For transplant kidney biopsies, most collected tissue for IF and EM only with specific clinical indications, performed C4d IF on frozen tissue if available, but few used the native kidney IF panel. Very few performed EM unconditionally, but most would if given specific indications. We conclude that actual nephropathology practices within the Renal Pathology Society are geographically uniform and similar to published best practices, with divergence in performing IF and EM on the basis of specimen adequacy and clinical input, particularly in transplant biopsies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)132-140
Number of pages9
JournalAdvances in Anatomic Pathology
Volume14
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2007

Fingerprint

Practice Guidelines
Electron Microscopy
Kidney
Fluorescence Microscopy
Fluorescent Antibody Technique
Biopsy
Transplants
Pathology
Light
Periodic Acid
Hematoxylin
Eosine Yellowish-(YS)
Surveys and Questionnaires
Silver
Microscopy
Staining and Labeling
Antibodies

Keywords

  • Electron microscopy
  • Immuno-fluorescence
  • Kidney biopsy
  • Nephropathology
  • Practice

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Anatomy

Cite this

Actual practices in nephropathology : A survey and comparison with best practices. / Pullman, James M.; Ferrario, Franco; Nast, Cynthia C.

In: Advances in Anatomic Pathology, Vol. 14, No. 2, 03.2007, p. 132-140.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{6c21ac3ef54949cf9a45188a3591c2c7,
title = "Actual practices in nephropathology: A survey and comparison with best practices",
abstract = "Nephropathology is a specialized field requiring routine tissue evaluation by immunofluorescence (IF), electron microscopy (EM), and light microscopy, and has published standards of best practice. Actual practices are less well documented. We therefore evaluated actual practices in nephropathology and their divergence from best practices. One hundred and twenty Renal Pathology Society members were given questionnaires regarding tissue handling, processing, and staining. Appropriate statistics for each question were calculated from results compiled into Microsoft Excel. Responses from 75 members showed that most received 16 or 18 gauge core biopsies, examined 9 slides for native kidneys, 8 slides for transplant kidneys, and for both used hematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid-Schiff, trichrome, and silver stains. For native kidney biopsies, most collected for IF and EM if tissue was adequate, while clinical input could influence the rest. Almost all performed IF on adequate samples, with a minimum of 8 antibodies, including both light chains, those from Europe sometimes without proof of adequacy. Half performed EM unconditionally, the remainder based on specimen adequacy or clinical input. For transplant kidney biopsies, most collected tissue for IF and EM only with specific clinical indications, performed C4d IF on frozen tissue if available, but few used the native kidney IF panel. Very few performed EM unconditionally, but most would if given specific indications. We conclude that actual nephropathology practices within the Renal Pathology Society are geographically uniform and similar to published best practices, with divergence in performing IF and EM on the basis of specimen adequacy and clinical input, particularly in transplant biopsies.",
keywords = "Electron microscopy, Immuno-fluorescence, Kidney biopsy, Nephropathology, Practice",
author = "Pullman, {James M.} and Franco Ferrario and Nast, {Cynthia C.}",
year = "2007",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1097/PAP.0b013e31803250d8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "14",
pages = "132--140",
journal = "Advances in Anatomic Pathology",
issn = "1072-4109",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Actual practices in nephropathology

T2 - A survey and comparison with best practices

AU - Pullman, James M.

AU - Ferrario, Franco

AU - Nast, Cynthia C.

PY - 2007/3

Y1 - 2007/3

N2 - Nephropathology is a specialized field requiring routine tissue evaluation by immunofluorescence (IF), electron microscopy (EM), and light microscopy, and has published standards of best practice. Actual practices are less well documented. We therefore evaluated actual practices in nephropathology and their divergence from best practices. One hundred and twenty Renal Pathology Society members were given questionnaires regarding tissue handling, processing, and staining. Appropriate statistics for each question were calculated from results compiled into Microsoft Excel. Responses from 75 members showed that most received 16 or 18 gauge core biopsies, examined 9 slides for native kidneys, 8 slides for transplant kidneys, and for both used hematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid-Schiff, trichrome, and silver stains. For native kidney biopsies, most collected for IF and EM if tissue was adequate, while clinical input could influence the rest. Almost all performed IF on adequate samples, with a minimum of 8 antibodies, including both light chains, those from Europe sometimes without proof of adequacy. Half performed EM unconditionally, the remainder based on specimen adequacy or clinical input. For transplant kidney biopsies, most collected tissue for IF and EM only with specific clinical indications, performed C4d IF on frozen tissue if available, but few used the native kidney IF panel. Very few performed EM unconditionally, but most would if given specific indications. We conclude that actual nephropathology practices within the Renal Pathology Society are geographically uniform and similar to published best practices, with divergence in performing IF and EM on the basis of specimen adequacy and clinical input, particularly in transplant biopsies.

AB - Nephropathology is a specialized field requiring routine tissue evaluation by immunofluorescence (IF), electron microscopy (EM), and light microscopy, and has published standards of best practice. Actual practices are less well documented. We therefore evaluated actual practices in nephropathology and their divergence from best practices. One hundred and twenty Renal Pathology Society members were given questionnaires regarding tissue handling, processing, and staining. Appropriate statistics for each question were calculated from results compiled into Microsoft Excel. Responses from 75 members showed that most received 16 or 18 gauge core biopsies, examined 9 slides for native kidneys, 8 slides for transplant kidneys, and for both used hematoxylin and eosin, periodic acid-Schiff, trichrome, and silver stains. For native kidney biopsies, most collected for IF and EM if tissue was adequate, while clinical input could influence the rest. Almost all performed IF on adequate samples, with a minimum of 8 antibodies, including both light chains, those from Europe sometimes without proof of adequacy. Half performed EM unconditionally, the remainder based on specimen adequacy or clinical input. For transplant kidney biopsies, most collected tissue for IF and EM only with specific clinical indications, performed C4d IF on frozen tissue if available, but few used the native kidney IF panel. Very few performed EM unconditionally, but most would if given specific indications. We conclude that actual nephropathology practices within the Renal Pathology Society are geographically uniform and similar to published best practices, with divergence in performing IF and EM on the basis of specimen adequacy and clinical input, particularly in transplant biopsies.

KW - Electron microscopy

KW - Immuno-fluorescence

KW - Kidney biopsy

KW - Nephropathology

KW - Practice

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34247635228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34247635228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PAP.0b013e31803250d8

DO - 10.1097/PAP.0b013e31803250d8

M3 - Article

C2 - 17471120

AN - SCOPUS:34247635228

VL - 14

SP - 132

EP - 140

JO - Advances in Anatomic Pathology

JF - Advances in Anatomic Pathology

SN - 1072-4109

IS - 2

ER -