Key result
Immunohistological staining for C9 detected early myocardial infarction in 96% of suspected cases, compared to 64% using conventional haematoxylin and eosin staining.
Why the study?
Does immunohistological staining for C9 improve the detection of early myocardial infarction compared to conventional histochemical and histological methods in necropsy specimens?
Population
58 hearts taken at necropsy
Comparison
Immunohistological staining for complement… vs Enzyme histochemical method and conventional…
Authors
Loading...
C9 immunostaining may improve early MI detection in necropsy; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
Observational (n=58)
Does immunohistological staining for C9 improve the detection of early myocardial infarction compared to conventional histochemical and histological methods in necropsy specimens?
Absolute Event Rate: 96% vs 64%
Immunohistological staining for C9 is a reliable and sensitive method for detecting early myocardial necrosis in formalin-fixed necropsy material, outperforming conventional H&E staining.
Doran et al. (1996) conducted an observational in Myocardial infarction (n=58). Immunohistological staining for C9 vs. Haematoxylin and eosin staining and enzyme histochemical methods was evaluated on Detection of myocardial infarction in suspected or confirmed cases. Immunohistological staining for C9 detected early myocardial infarction in 96% of suspected cases, compared to 64% using conventional haematoxylin and eosin staining.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: