Stegehuis F, de Vries G P, Jöbsis A C, Meijer A E
Histochemistry. 1979 Jul;62(1):45-54. doi: 10.1007/BF00537005.
The results obtained with the indirect peroxidase technique for the identification of prostate specific acid phosphatase in formalin fixed, paraffin or paraplast embedded autopsy material are compared with the results obtained with the mixed aggregation immuno-cytochemical technique. When using a monospecific antiserum the former technique is prefered. However, when a monospecific antiserum is not available, one has to balance the advantages of the mixed aggregation immuno-cytochemical technique against the disadvantages of having to prepare a monospecific antiserum, necessary for the indirect peroxidase technique. Both methods appeared positive in 20 prostatic carcinomas and in 36 metastases of prostatic carcinomas. In the epithelium of the seminal vesicles and in osteoclasts no acid phosphatase could be detected with the antiserum. A comparison of both techniques, as well as different types of preincubation to diminish nonspecific background staining are discussed.
将用间接过氧化物酶技术在福尔马林固定、石蜡或塑模包埋的尸检材料中鉴定前列腺特异性酸性磷酸酶所获得的结果，与用混合凝集免疫细胞化学技术获得的结果进行比较。使用单特异性抗血清时，优先选择前一种技术。然而，当没有单特异性抗血清时，必须权衡混合凝集免疫细胞化学技术的优点与制备间接过氧化物酶技术所需的单特异性抗血清的缺点。两种方法在20例前列腺癌和36例前列腺癌转移灶中均呈阳性。在精囊上皮和破骨细胞中，用该抗血清未检测到酸性磷酸酶。讨论了两种技术的比较以及不同类型的预孵育以减少非特异性背景染色。
