2/14/97


Our lab has been asked to characterize lyophilized human lung tissue by

SEM and XRF analysis. Not being pathologists and having no prior

experience with biological tissue samples, we are concerned about

potential health risks from handling this material. The samples were

collected and lyophilized at least 20 years ago and have been in storage

all this time. Sample preparation for the XRF analysis will require

pulverizing the material with mortar and pestle and depositing this fine

dust onto filter subtrates for analysis with the potential for exposure to

or inhalation of the dust. Our safety officer doesn't know whether any

viruses or bacteria could still be viable in any of these samples, and is

not sure what level of safety precautions are required: e.g., Should the

work be done in a hood certified for biohazard work or is this overkill?

Should the lab technician be inoculated against hepatitis B? Moon suits

and hazard pay? (I'm joking, but maybe I shouldn't be). The histories of

the tissue donors are available if that would be a determining factor but I

don't think many died of an infectious disease.

Thanks for any comments and suggestions.

Bob Willis

ManTech Environmental

email: Willis.robert@epamail.epa.gov


If I were you, I would take every precaution that you would with fresh

tissue. If stored properly , lyophilized microbes can survive a long time.

When I was a postdoc we got live cultures from lyophilized samples that

were under vacuum and stored at 4 degrees C for over 40 years. This was not

an exception but rather the rule. So if these samples have not been fixed

or other denatured or sterilized, I would be careful.

G.W. Erdos, Ph.D. Phone: 352-392-1295

Scientific Director,

ICBR Electron Microscopy Core Lab

218 Carr Hall Fax: 352-846-0251

University of Florida E-mail: gwe@biotech.ufl.edu

Gainesville, FL 32611 http://www.biotech.ufl.edu/~emcl/

Home of the #1 Gators


Our lab has been asked to characterize lyophilized human lung tissue by

> SEM and XRF analysis. Not being pathologists and having no prior

> experience with biological tissue samples, we are concerned about

> potential health risks from handling this material. The samples were

> collected and lyophilized at least 20 years ago and have been in storage

> all this time. Sample preparation for the XRF analysis will require

> pulverizing the material with mortar and pestle and depositing this fine

> dust onto filter subtrates for analysis with the potential for exposure to

> or inhalation of the dust. Our safety officer doesn't know whether any

> viruses or bacteria could still be viable in any of these samples,

POSSIBLY

and is not sure what level of safety precautions are required: e.g.,

Should the

> work be done in a hood certified for biohazard work or is this overkill?

DEFINITELY. NOT OVERKILL.

> Should the lab technician be inoculated against hepatitis B?

JUST DON'T STAB YOURSELF WITH CONTAMINATED FORCEPS.

Moon suits

> and hazard pay? (I'm joking, but maybe I shouldn't be). The histories of

> the tissue donors are available if that would be a determining factor but I

> don't think many died of an infectious disease.

>

I'D WORRY MORE ABOUT TB THAN HEPATITIS. TB IS VERY INFECTIOUS IN

AEROSOLS AND DUST. I'D MAKE SURE NONE OF THE DUST ESCAPES, OR FIX IT

SOMEHOW, IF YOU CAN KEEP FROM CONTAMINATING YOUR ANALYSIS WITH SOMETHING

THAT WOULD RUIN YOUR TEST. HOW ABOUT OSMIUM VAPOR??? JUST DON'T TAKE ANY

CHANCES. REGULATIONS NOW REQUIRE THAT YOU TREAT ALL TISSUES AND

BODLIY FLUIDS AS THOUGH THEY MAY BE INFECTIOUS.

Sara E. Miller, Ph. D.

P. O. Box 3020

Duke University Medical Center

Durham, NC 27710

Ph: 919 684-3452

FAX: 919 684-8735

saram@acpub.duke.edu


This is not my area but I've done quite a lot of EM on viruses for others.

Several have commented to me that putting a virus in the electron beam,

which has similarities to putting it at the centre of a small nuclear

explosion, is probably the only sure way to kill a virus. And until that

point, they always regard a virus as 'alive', whatever chemicals it may

have gone through.

Regards,

Larry Stoter

LPS@teknesis.demon.co.uk


Larry and Bob,

There are many ways of killing viruses, besides electron beams; however,

I wouldn't assume that the electron beam hits every nm of space on the

sample, and hence, kills everything that went into the scope!!>

Furthermore, the dust from grinding specimen flying around while you're

preparing it for EM could be infectious. See my earlier comment on TB.

Sara

Sara E. Miller, Ph. D.

P. O. Box 3020

Duke University Medical Center

Durham, NC 27710

Ph: 919 684-3452

FAX: 919 684-8735

saram@acpub.duke.edu


Ah nostalgia! 20 years ago I was starting my Path residency. Pathogens in

the specimens may very well still be viable. At least you don't have to

worry too much about HIV- but I wouldn't have been worried about that

anyways- it's not known to be transmissible by inhalation. My major concern

would be tuberculosis. Most of the bacteria and viruses that might lurk in

old lungs are unlikely to cause serious disease in a person with an intact

immune system. TB can cause a serious infection despite a good immune

system and infection can be established with a very small dose.

>Sample preparation for the XRF analysis will require

>pulverizing the material with mortar and pestle and depositing this fine

>dust onto filter subtrates for analysis with the potential for exposure to

>or inhalation of the dust.

Now I'm really concerned about TB. The pulverization is a perfect way to

get aerosols into your lungs.

>Our safety officer doesn't know whether any

>viruses or bacteria could still be viable in any of these samples, and is

>not sure what level of safety precautions are required: e.g., Should the

>work be done in a hood certified for biohazard work or is this overkill?

>Should the lab technician be inoculated against hepatitis B? Moon suits

>and hazard pay? (I'm joking, but maybe I shouldn't be).

Doing the work in a hood is not a bad idea. You could probably get away

with having everyone in the room wear a respirator with a filter fine

enough to filter out TB ("N95" respirator). These are available as powered

positive air pressure units or as disposable non-powered units. A surgical

face mask would not be sufficient. Hepatitis B vaccination shouldn't be

necessary, it's another bug that probably isn't transmitted by inhalation,

but the vaccine is low risk and inexpensive so why not?

>The histories of

>the tissue donors are available if that would be a determining factor but I

>don't think many died of an infectious disease.

You might want to look at occupational histories. Some groups, e.g. miners,

had higher incidence of TB.

I hope this helps.

Leon



--

Leon A. Metlay, M.D.,Associate Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

University of Rochester Medical Center Phone: (716) 275-5691

P.O. Box 626 Fax: (716) 273-1027

Rochester, NY 14642 lmetlay@acu.pathology.rochester.edu

http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/smd/pathres/URPLM.html


Wearing a respirator is a lot better than nothing. But surely, pulverising

the tissue out on the open bench will cause fine particles to fly all over

the lab with every air current, contaminating everything and everybody in

the lab. I would use a biohazard hood.

Lesley Weston

Oral Biology

University of British Columbia

Vancouver, B.C., Canada

lesley@unixg.ubc.ca


I agree that using a hood will prevent particles from getting onto

environmental surfaces. If you have a hood use it. On the other hand, I

wouldn't be really concerned about infectious particles on environmental

surfaces. The bugs I'm more concerned about spread by inhalation, not by

skin contact. If you don't want to risk bringing something home with you, a

surgical gown or similar smock can be used to protect your clothing.

Leon A. Metlay, M.D.,Associate Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

University of Rochester Medical Center Phone: (716) 275-5691

P.O. Box 626 Fax: (716) 273-1027

Rochester, NY 14642 lmetlay@acu.pathology.rochester.edu

http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/smd/pathres/URPLM.html


You indicated that you would be grinding up the tissues. Why not embed in

paraffin and then cut slices which could be attached to an inert substrate,

deparaffinized and examined in the SEM. This would keep aerosols to a

minimum - if not eliminate them entirely by encapsulation in paraffin

during the critical cutting stage.

John J. Bozzola, Ph.D., Director

Center for Electron Microscopy

Neckers Building, Room 146 - B Wing

Southern Illinois University

Carbondale, IL 62901-4402

U.S.A.

Phone: 618-453-3730

Fax: 618-453-2665

Email: bozzola@siu.edu

Web: http://www.siu.edu/departments/shops/cem.html


[Return to Tips & Tricks Menu]