{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020985401459854013, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.032051282051282, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Combining histological and ultrastructural description of high-pressure frozen skin samples by correlative CLSM and TEM

Structural investigation of tissue biopsies requires the coupling of optimal structural sample preservation with detailed information collected at the light and electron microscopic level. Unfortunately, although cryo-immobilisation by high-pressure freezing provides the best structural preservation, it is used routinely only for EM investigations, while for light microscopy chemical fixation protocols have been established. These chemically invasive fixation protocols have the drawback of introducing unpredictable fixation artefacts. Therefore, comparative histopathological (i.e. light microscopic) and ultrastructural (i.e. electron microscopic, EM) results are usually obtained from parallel samples that have not been prepared identically and never by examining exactly the same features in exactly the same, optimally preserved sample. Finally, finding an area of interest for EM investigation within a complex tissue is like searching for a needle in a haystack.