A comparison of three column agglutination tests for red blood cell alloantibody identification

Siska Blomme,Eline Verhoye,Emilie De Maertelaere

doi:10.1186/s13104-020-04974-x

Siska Blomme, Eline Verhoye + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-020-04974-x

Copy DOI

Journal: BMC research notes	Publication Date: Mar 4, 2020
Citations: 5	License type: open-access

Affiliation: KU Leuven, AZ Delta, Ghent University Hospital

Abstract

ObjectiveCommercial kits of column tests for pre-transfusion testing have progressively replaced conventional tube tests in most laboratories. Aim of this study was to compare three commercial test cell panels for the identification of irregular red blood cell (RBC) alloantibodies. Overall, 44 samples with a positive indirect antiglobulin test (IAT) by routine testing were used for comparison of following panels: Ortho RESOLVE® panelC (Ortho Clinical Diagnostics (OCD), Milan, Italy), ID-DiaPanel(-P) (Bio-Rad Laboratories, CA, USA) and Identisera Diana(P) (Grifols, Barcelona, Spain). Column agglutination techniques were used, with microtubes containing either microgel (Bio-Rad/Grifols) or glass bead microparticles (Ortho).ResultsAlloantibody identification was possible in 38 samples, of which identical identification was shown in 33 samples by all methods. The remaining samples showed differences between certain methods, with the gel card system being superior to the glass card system for analyzing stored samples Considering that not all samples were evaluated in all three methods, the concordance rate reached 100% between Bio-Rad and Grifols, 90.5% between Bio-Rad and OCD, 86.5% between OCD and Grifols and 90.5% between all methods. Although differences in sensitivities were seen for specific antibodies, the three methods showed comparable performance for the identification of RBC alloantibodies.

Highlights

Alloantibody identification was possible in 38 samples, of which identical identification was shown in 33 samples by all methods
The remaining samples showed differences between certain methods, with the gel card system being superior to the glass card system for analyzing stored samples Considering that not all samples were evaluated in all three methods, the concordance rate reached 100% between Bio-Rad and Grifols, 90.5% between BioRad and Ortho Clinical Diagnostics (OCD), 86.5% between OCD and Grifols and 90.5% between all methods
The screening and identification of red blood cell (RBC) alloantibodies is performed as pre-transfusion testing (Type and Screen) and in pregnancy to detect potential hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN)

Summary

Introduction

The screening and identification of red blood cell (RBC) alloantibodies is performed as pre-transfusion testing (Type and Screen) and in pregnancy to detect potential hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN). A low ionic strength solution (LISS) indirect antiglobulin test (IAT) is considered the most suitable for the detection of clinically significant antibodies because of its speed, sensitivity and specificity [1, 2]. If the antibody screen is negative, it can be predicted that more than 99% [2, 6] of the RBC units electronically matched for ABO groups will be compatible in the crossmatch (XM) test [7]. An identification panel must contain RBC from group O donors with at least two phenotypes lacking and Blomme et al BMC Res Notes (2020) 13:129 at least two phenotypes expressing the corresponding antigen (K, k, Jka, Jkb, S, s, Fya and Fyb) [3, 5]

Results

Discussion

Conclusion