Corporate · Global B2B
Performance

Measured against cell-block IHC in routine workflow.

Documented MVZ Frankfurt time-motion study comparing routine pleural-effusion samples processed by cell-block IHC and X-ZELL NGC workflows.

Headline metrics

A faster, lower-touch multiplex workflow.

Figures below are framed as workflow performance, not as a stand-alone diagnostic-accuracy trial.

3 h 23 min

Total sample-to-screen turnaround in the deck, compared with 38 h 46 min for cell-block IHC.

1 MTA

The consolidated workflow moves from multiple MTAs and stations to one MTA at one workstation.

15 steps

The NGC path reduces process steps while adding eight-channel multiplex information on one slide.

8 data points

A single NGC slide can yield up to eight marker data points from limited cytology material.

36 kg

Cryofixator™ and Cryostainer™ are listed at 18 kg each, versus a 295 kg comparator system.

No transfers

Workflow consolidation reduces handoffs between separate stations and manual sample movement.

Benchmark

X-ZELL NGC vs. cell-block plus automated IHC.

Compares a Roche Ventana Benchmark-class cell-block + automated IHC workflow with the X-ZELL NGC architecture.

Cell-block + automated IHC

Comparator workflow

Cell-blocking required. One antibody per slide. Approximately 38 h 46 min sample-to-screen turnaround. Multiple technicians, multiple stations, and repeated sample movement.

X-ZELL NGC

Single-slide multiplex workflow

No cell-blocking. Up to eight antibodies per slide. Under-four-hour sample-to-screen workflow. One MTA, one workstation, and direct digital channel review.

Source framing

How to read the performance claims.

Source: MVZ / Institute of Pathology Main-Taunus, Frankfurt (2022-2023), as summarized in the master deck. The study is described as a single-site time-motion study with a before/after design and two documented routine runs of 27 pleural-effusion samples processed in both workflows.

The figures should be presented as workflow and handling measures unless the accompanying clinical-validation evidence is also reviewed.

Evidence pathway

Next, review concordance and validation.

The validation page summarizes the 2026 clinical-validation section of the deck, including antibody-level concordance.

Evidence note: Clinical performance must be established in the intended patient-specimen context. Product availability, regulatory status, and intended use may vary by market. Please contact X-ZELL for current documentation.