Automation in anatomical pathology is transforming tissue embedding by helping pathology laboratories improve efficiency, standardisation and traceability while keeping tissue orientation under the control of skilled professionals. A pilot study at the University and Hospital Trust of Padua provides a real-world example of what semi-automated embedding can achieve in a high-volume pathology laboratory.
For laboratories handling hundreds of specimens every day, even small differences in embedding time or quality can result in significant workload. This is where the potential of anatomical pathology automation becomes particularly interesting.
What happens when embedding is partially automated?
To investigate this question in a real laboratory environment, the University and Hospital Trust of Padua conducted a pilot test of Inpeco’s FlexPath™ Blox, a semi-automated solution designed to automate the non-technical tasks associated with tissue embedding.
The pilot took place in a high-volume anatomical pathology laboratory, where the workflow included approximately 900 FFPE blocks per day.
Rather than removing the technician from the process, the approach was designed to separate repetitive handling tasks from the part of the process where professional expertise is most important: the correct orientation of the tissue.
This distinction is important. Automation in pathology does not necessarily mean automating every step. It can also mean identifying which parts of a workflow can be standardised and automated while allowing laboratory professionals to concentrate on tasks that require their judgement.
From 70 seconds to 37 seconds per block
One of the clearest findings from the Padua pilot was the reduction in embedding time.
Compared with manual embedding, the semi-automated workflow reduced the average embedding time by approximately 47%, from around 70 seconds to 37 seconds per block.
The impact was even more significant when looking specifically at surgical specimens, where the study reported a 54% reduction in time.
In a high-volume laboratory, these differences are not trivial. When hundreds of blocks are processed every day, saving seconds on each block can translate into hours of recovered technician time.
For a laboratory processing around 900 FFPE blocks per day, the reported embedding time decreased from approximately 17.5 hours per day to 9.3 hours.
That represents a saving of more than 8 hours of embedding time every day, equivalent to roughly one full-time employee and more than 250 technician working days per year.
Efficiency is only one part of automation
Speed alone does not determine whether an automated embedding solution is valuable.
In histology, the quality and consistency of paraffin embedding directly influence what happens downstream. Poor orientation may require deeper sections, re-embedding or other technical interventions, adding work to an already busy laboratory.
The Padua pilot therefore also looked at these downstream indicators. For skin biopsies, requests for deeper levels decreased from 40% to 13.5%. For surgical specimens, they fell from 10% to 2%.
Re-embedding requirements also decreased. For skin biopsies, re-embedding fell from 5% to 1%, while no re-embedding was required for the surgical specimens evaluated during the pilot. Importantly, the study reported no embedding-related nonconformities during the pilot period.
These results suggest that the potential benefit of automation extends beyond simply processing blocks faster. More consistent embedding can help reduce technical rework and improve the overall efficiency of the pathology laboratory workflow.
Standardisation and traceability matter too
Another important aspect of laboratory automation is not always visible in a simple throughput calculation: standardisation.
Manual processes can naturally vary between operators and throughout a working day. A standardised workflow can help laboratories reduce this variability while maintaining clear information about specimens and cases.
FlexPath™ Blox incorporates LIS integration and automated case handling, supporting traceability throughout the embedding workflow. This is particularly relevant in anatomical pathology, where specimen identification, case handling and tissue traceability are fundamental requirements.
The Padua experience also highlighted reductions in paraffin waste and cleanup time, adding another operational benefit to the workflow.
What does automation mean for pathology laboratories?
The Padua pilot illustrates a broader point about histology laboratory automation: the value of automation does not necessarily come from replacing a complete workflow with a machine. Instead, significant gains can come from automating the repetitive and non-technical components of a process.
In tissue embedding, this can allow laboratory professionals to spend less time on routine handling and more time on the task where their expertise matters most, ensuring that tissue is correctly oriented.
For high-volume laboratories, this distinction can have a measurable impact on capacity, workload and consistency.
It also provides an example of how automation can be introduced into an existing workflow without treating the laboratory as a completely new environment. The objective is to support the people, processes and systems already in place.
From automated embedding to a more connected pathology workflow
The Padua pilot was focused on embedding, but it also reflects a wider direction in anatomical pathology automation.
Modern pathology laboratories increasingly need to manage growing workloads while maintaining quality, traceability and efficient use of skilled personnel. Automation can address individual bottlenecks within this workflow while also creating opportunities for greater integration between instruments, information systems and specimen handling.
Inpeco’s FlexPath™ approach brings together several elements of this model, including data collection and traceability, instrumentation integration, automation of non-technical tasks and specimen handling. FlexPath™ Blox focuses specifically on embedding, demonstrating how one carefully selected automation step can produce measurable improvements in a real laboratory environment.
The Padua experience therefore raises a useful question for laboratories considering automation: where is the greatest opportunity to reduce repetitive work without reducing the value of professional expertise? For some laboratories, tissue embedding may be one of those opportunities.
The Science Support: supporting smarter pathology workflows
Choosing an automation solution is ultimately about more than the instrument itself. Laboratory volume, workflow design, existing systems, staffing and future capacity all need to be considered together.
For anatomical pathology laboratories looking to improve efficiency, standardisation and traceability, Inpeco FlexPath™ Blox offers an example of how targeted automation can transform a routine step such as tissue embedding while keeping the expertise of laboratory professionals at the centre of the process.
At The Science Support, we help laboratories evaluate technologies and solutions in the context of their wider workflow, connecting them with solutions that can address specific operational challenges. Discover our complete portfolio of integrated solutions for scientific, diagnostic and clinical applications.