Proposals for best-quality immunohistochemical staining of paraffin-embedded brain tissue slides in forensics
Immunohistochemistry (IHC) has become an integral part in forensic histopathology over the last decades. However, the underlying methods for IHC vary greatly depending on the institution, creating a lack of comparability. The aim of this study was to assess the optimal approach for different technical aspects of IHC, in order to improve and standardize this procedure. Therefore, qualitative results from manual and automatic IHC staining of brain samples were compared, as well as potential differences in suitability of common IHC glass slides. Further, possibilities of image digitalization and connected issues were investigated. In our study, automatic staining showed more consistent staining results, compared to manual staining procedures. Digitalization and digital post-processing facilitated direct analysis and analysis for reproducibility considerably. No differences were found for different commercially available microscopic glass slides regarding suitability of IHC brain researches, but a certain rate of tissue loss should be expected during the staining process.
KeywordsBiomarker Evaluation Forensic neuropathology GFAP Immunohistochemistry Traumatic brain injury
Compliance with ethical standards
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Indeed, they did not receive any funding from the named companies. All of them are not aware of this method paper and the presented results.
- 1.Bremicker K, Grohmann M, Becker J, Ondruschka B, Dreßler J, Weber H, Franke H (2013) Humane Schädel-Hirn-Traumen – Beteiligung purinerger Rezeptoren an der Astrogliose. Rechtsmedizin 23(4):327. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00194-013-0903-8
- 4.Conway C, Dobson L, O’Grady A, Kay E, Costello S, O’Shea D (2008) Virtual microscopy as an enabler of automated/quantitative assessment of protein expression in TMAs. Histochem Cell Biol 130(3):447-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00418-008-0480-1
- 6.Franke H, Parravicine C, Lecca D, Zanier ER, Heine C, Bremicker K, Fumagalli M, Rosa P, Longhi L, Stocchetti N, De Simoni MG, Weber M, Abbracchio MP (2013) Changes of the GPR17 receptor, a new target for neurorepair, in neurons and glial cells in patients with traumatic brain injury. Purinergic Signal 9(3):451–462. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11302-013-9366-3 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 10.Krohn M, Dreßler J, Bauer M, Schober K, Franke H, Ondruschka B (2015) Immunohistochemical investigation of S100 and NSE in cases of traumatic brain injury and its application for survival time determination. J Neurotrauma 32(7):430–440. https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2014.3524 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Li DR, Zhang F, Wang Y, Tan XH, Qiao DF, Wang HJ, Michiue T, Maeda H (2012) Quantitative analysis of GFAP- and S100 protein-immunopositive astrocytes to investigate the severity of traumatic brain injury. Legal Med (Tokyo) 14(2):84–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2011.12.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.O’Hurley G, Sjöstedt E, Rahman A, Li B, Kampf C, Pontén F, Gallagher WM, Lindskog C (2014) Garbage in, garbage out: a critical evaluation of strategies used for validation of immunohistochemical biomarkers. Mol Oncol 8(4):783–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2014.03.008 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 16.Sabatasso S, Pomponio C, Fracasso T (2017) Technical note: EnVision™ FLEX improves the detectability of depletions of myoglobin and troponin T in forensic cases of myocardial ischemia/infarction. Int J Legal Med 131(6):1643–1646. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00414-017-1575-9 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.Sabattini E, Bisgaard K, Ascani S, Poggi S, Piccioli M, Ceccarelli C, Pieri F, Fraternali-Orcioni G, Pileri SA (1998) The EnVision++ system: a new immunohistochemical method for diagnostics and research. Critical comparison with the APAAP, ChemMate, CSA, LABC, and SABC techniques. J Clin Pathol 51(7):506–511. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.51.7.506 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar