scholarly journals Cytology Specimen Collection Procedure

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
2011 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 364-367 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia C. Gage ◽  
Arpita Ghosh ◽  
Sylvia Borgonovo ◽  
Stephen Follansbee ◽  
Nicolas Wentzensen ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
J. Temple Black ◽  
Jose Guerrero

In the SEM, contrast in the image is the result of variations in the volume secondary electron emission and backscatter emission which reaches the detector and serves to intensity modulate the signal for the CRT's. This emission is a function of the accelerating potential, material density, chemistry, crystallography, local charge effects, surface morphology and especially the angle of the incident electron beam with the particular surface site. Aside from the influence of object inclination, the surface morphology is the most important feature In producing contrast. “Specimen collection“ is the name given the shielding of the collector by adjacent parts of the specimen, producing much image contrast. This type of contrast can occur for both secondary and backscatter electrons even though the secondary electrons take curved paths to the detector-collector.Figure 1 demonstrates, in a unique and striking fashion, the specimen collection effect. The subject material here is Armco Iron, 99.85% purity, which was spark machined.


2002 ◽  
Vol 48 (10) ◽  
pp. 1781-1784 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer K Pai ◽  
Gary C Curhan ◽  
Carolyn C Cannuscio ◽  
Nader Rifai ◽  
Paul M Ridker ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (6) ◽  
pp. S50
Author(s):  
Ashleigh J. Goris ◽  
Kathleen M. McMullen ◽  
Rebecca S. Wade

Author(s):  
Ron M Kagan ◽  
Amy A Rogers ◽  
Gwynngelle A Borillo ◽  
Nigel J Clarke ◽  
Elizabeth M Marlowe

Abstract Background The use of a remote specimen collection strategy employing a kit designed for unobserved self-collection for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR can decrease the use of PPE and exposure risk. To assess the impact of unobserved specimen self-collection on test performance, we examined results from a SARS-CoV-2 qualitative RT-PCR test for self-collected specimens from participants in a return-to-work screening program and assessed the impact of a pooled testing strategy in this cohort. Methods Self-collected anterior nasal swabs from employee return to work programs were tested using the Quest Diagnostics SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR EUA. The Ct values for the N1 and N3 N-gene targets and a human RNase P (RP) gene control target were tabulated. For comparison, we utilized Ct values from a cohort of HCP-collected specimens from patients with and without COVID-19 symptoms. Results Among 47,923 participants, 1.8% were positive. RP failed to amplify for 13/115,435 (0.011%) specimens. The median (IQR) Cts were 32.7 (25.0-35.7) for N1 and 31.3 (23.8-34.2) for N3. Median Ct values in the self-collected cohort were significantly higher than those of symptomatic, but not asymptomatic patients. Based on Ct values, pooled testing with 4 specimens would have yielded inconclusive results in 67/1,268 (5.2%) specimens but only a single false-negative result. Conclusions Unobserved self-collection of nasal swabs provides adequate sampling for SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing. These findings alleviate concerns of increased false negatives in this context. Specimen pooling could be used for this population as the likelihood of false negative results is very low due when using a sensitive, dual-target methodology.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document