Objective: To evaluate a fully automated processing system (TACAS™ Pro) for liquid-based procedures (LBPs). Methods and Materials: Materials were 3,483 and additionally 502 specimens that were taken at Kanagawa Health Service Association. Specimens obtained with a Cervex-Brush® were first smeared to glass slides using one side of the brush and then processed to TACAS Pro. Results: (1) The microscopy watching time per normal case was 3.65 ± 0.85 min in the conventional procedure, whereas in the LBP it was 1.95 ± 0.60 min, and the latter reduced workload to 53%. (2) The handling time of TACAS Pro per day was 2 h and 25.8 min. The workload at a laboratory offset it and revealed the work saving to be 63.8%. (3) Unsatisfactory rates were 0% in the conventional procedure, whereas in the LBP it was 1.88% at first. The latter rate decreased to 0.5% after system improvement. (4) Specimens which may disturb microscopy analysis were found in 1.06%, including 3 cases of possible carry-over of cells to the following slides. An additional study with the revised system confirmed no carry-over. (5) Incidences of abnormal cytology were consistent between the two methods. Conclusions: The revised automated processing system TACAS Pro is a feasible and useful LBP and reduces the workload of cytology laboratories.

Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.