Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2018 Dec 7;8(1):17718.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-36102-y.

Comparison of Four Staining Methods for Detecting Eosinophils in Nasal Polyps

Affiliations
Free PMC article
Comparative Study

Comparison of Four Staining Methods for Detecting Eosinophils in Nasal Polyps

Yu Song et al. Sci Rep. .
Free PMC article

Abstract

The study aimed to find a more appropriate method to detect eosinophils in formalin- fixed nasal polyps, since there is no consensus on the standard counting method of eosinophils now. Four 5 μm serial sections were obtained from each 10% neutral formalin-fixed paraffin block and were stained with Chromotrope 2R, Congo red, MBPmAb immunohistochemistry, and conventional hematoxylin and eosin stain respectively. Each section was scanned by the Aperio digital section scanner. The same selected areas were procured for assessment in the serial sections. Chromotrope 2R and MBPmAb immunohistochemistry were specific in detecting eosinophils, which had the lower background staining compared with Congo red and conventional hematoxylin and eosin stain. There were significant differences among the four methods in terms of the eosinophil counting data (p < 0.05), while no significant difference between Chromotrope 2R and Congo red (P = 0.1413). The eosinophil counts in nasal polyps could be more accurately assessed by Chromotrope 2R and Congo red compared with MBPmAb immunohistochemistry and conventional hematoxylin and eosin stain. The popularization of Chromotrope 2R and Congo red may help to unify the eosinophil count in the definition of eosinophilic CRSwNP.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Select the same area for quantitative assessment (×50).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Background staining among the four methods. (×400).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Eosinophil counting data among the four staining methods.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The staining of eosinophil dense area. (×400).

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Fokkens WJ, et al. EPOS 2012: European position paper on rhinosinusitis and nasal polyps 2012. A summary for otorhinolaryngologists. Rhinology. 2012;50:1–12. doi: 10.4193/Rhino50E2. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kuhar, H. N. et al. In International forum of allergy & rhinology. 990–998 (Wiley Online Library). - PubMed
    1. Ishitoya J, Sakuma Y, Tsukuda M. Eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis in Japan. Allergology International. 2010;59:239–245. doi: 10.2332/allergolint.10-RAI-0231. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Okada, N. et al. In International forum of allergy & rhinology. 592–604 (Wiley Online Library).
    1. Bachert C, Zhang L, Gevaert P. Current and future treatment options for adult chronic rhinosinusitis: focus on nasal polyposis. Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 2015;136:1431–1440. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2015.10.010. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Feedback