Comparative Study of Tissue Processing and Staining Using Microwave and Routine Method
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21276/apalm.3832Keywords:
microwave, tissue processing, tissue staining, histopathology, turnaround timeAbstract
Background: Conventional tissue processing in histopathology requires 16-24 hours, creating longer turn-around time in routine histopathology laboratory work. Microwave-assisted tissue processing (MTP) has emerged as a promising alternative for rapid histopathological diagnosis.
Objective: To evaluate the diagnostic utility and efficiency of domestic microwave-assisted tissue processing and staining in comparison to routine histopathology method.
Methods: This prospective, cross-sectional analytical study compared conventional and microwave-assisted tissue processing using 350 paired tissue specimens (700 total) over three years. Tissues were sectioned into two equal halves, with one processed conventionally and the other using a Samsung domestic microwave (300W for processing, 180W for staining). Quality parameters including cellular details, cytoplasmic preservation, nuclear clarity, and staining characteristics were blindly evaluated using a scoring system (0-40 points).
Result: Microwave processing reduced turnaround time from 16 hours 20 minutes to 81 minutes (processing: 67 minutes vs 16 hours; staining: 14 minutes vs 20 minutes). Statistical analysis revealed superior performance in cellular outline, nuclear-cytoplasmic contrast, nuclear/nucleolar clarity, chromatin preservation, and color intensity (p<0.05). Both methods showed equivalent performance in tissue integrity and nuclear membrane clarity. Special stains (PAS, Alcian blue, Masson's trichrome, Fontana-Masson) and immunohistochemistry demonstrated comparable results.
Conclusion: Domestic microwave-assisted tissue processing produces diagnostic quality equivalent or superior to conventional methods with reduction of turnaround time. This technology enables same-day diagnosis, particularly beneficial for critically ill patients and small biopsies, representing a paradigm shift toward efficient, environmentally conscious histopathology practice.
References
1. FinNie O, Aye SN, Krishnappa P, Ravindran R. A comparative study of microwave oven-assisted tissue processing and conventional method of tissue processing on turnaround laboratory time and morphological quality of tissue sections. Med J Malaysia. 2023;78(2):202–206.
2. Wolfe D. Tissue processing. In: Suvarna SK, Layton C, Bancroft JD, editors. Bancroft's Theory and Practice of Histological Techniques. 8th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2019. p. 73-83.
3. Mishra P, Bandyopadhyay A, Kumar H, Dash KC, Bhuyan L, Panda A. Microwave-based rapid tissue processing technique: a novel aid in histopathologic laboratory. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2021;13(Suppl 1):S566–S570.
4. Shirbhate PN, Deshmukh AV, Shivkumar VB. Rapid microwave tissue processing and staining method using a kitchen microwave oven in histopathology laboratory: a comparative study with routine histoprocessing method. Med J Babylon. 2022;19(3):383–390.
5. Rohr LR, Layfield LJ, Wallin D, Hardy D. A comparison of routine and rapid microwave tissue processing in a surgical pathology laboratory: quality of histologic sections and advantages of microwave processing. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;115(5):703–708.
6. Donald S, Kaur R, Issacs R. Microwave‑assisted versus conventional tissue processing in histopathology: a prospective comparative analysis. J Contemp Clin Pract. 2025;11(12):329–338.
7. Rao M, Pai SM, Khanagar SB, Siddeeqh S, Devang DD, Naik S. Microwave-assisted tissue processing, fixation and staining in tissues of different thicknesses: A comparative study. J Oral Maxillofac Pathol. 2020;24(1):186.
8. Mukunda A, Shreedhar B, Narayan TVR, Shashidhara R, Mohanty L, Shenoy S. A comparative study on microwave tissue processing and conventional tissue processing. Oral Maxillofac Pathol J. 2022;13(1):11–17.
9. Tupsakhare S, Saraf K, Patil K, Gabhane M, Deshpande R, Agwane S. A comparative study of tissue processing using microwave without xylene and conventional method. Schol Acad J Biosci. 2016;4(10A):796–804.
10. Chandy D, D'Souza PS, David SJ. Tissue processing using microwave oven: a boon for histology slide preparation. Int J Anat Res. 2024;12(2):8903–8909.
11. Priya AHH, Venkatanarasu VB, Chellaswamy S, Jeyaraj M, Francis SF, Rajasekaran S. Evaluation of efficacy of microwave staining over conventional staining in replicating tissue architecture: a prospective study. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2020;12(Suppl 1):S283–S288.
12. Ramakrishnan J, Sideeque A, Khader RA. Comparative analysis of immunohistochemistry of hormone receptors in breast cancer by conventional and microwave tissue processing methods. J Clin Diagn Res. 2021;15(7):EC03–EC06.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Hiral Shah, Shilpi Daveshwar, Rajiv Daveshwar, Meena Daveshwar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).
How to Cite
