ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An automation system for ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening has been developed and its use is increasing. We compared the results of ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening tests using the manual (ABO-RhD typing) or semiautomated (antibody screening) method and with the automation instruments Galileo NEO (Immucor Gamma, Norcoss, USA) and QWALYS-3 (DIAGAST, Loos Cedex, France). METHODS: A total of 332 blood samples were tested for ABO-RhD typing in comparison with routine manual tests, and 236 samples for antibody screening in comparison with DS-Screening II (Bio-Rad Laboratories, 1785 Cressier FR, Switzerland). We evaluated the performance of Galileo NEO and QWALYS-3 in terms of concordance, carryover, and sensitivity test for ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening. RESULTS: The concordance rates of ABO-RhD typing results between the manual methods and the two instruments were 99.4% for Galileo NEO and 99.1% for QWALYS-3, respectively. On antibody screening tests, a concordance rate of 97.9% was observed between the semiautomated method and Galileo NEO or QWALYS-3, because of discordance in five specimens. The carryover was not observed for ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening. The overall sensitivity of the two automation instruments appears to be parallel with that of DS-Screening II except for anti-E. CONCLUSION: The Galileo NEO and QWALYS-3 system showed good performance, it can be used with confidence for routine pre-transfusion testing in the blood bank.
Subject(s)
Automation , Blood Banks , Mass ScreeningABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Despite modern advances in laboratory automated medicine, work-process in the blood bank is still handled manually. Several automated immunohematological instruments have been developed and are available in the market. The IH-1000 (Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, CA, USA), a fully automated instrument for immunohematology, was recently introduced. In this study, we evaluated the performance of the IH-1000 for ABO/Rh typing and irregular antibody screening. METHODS: In October 2011, a total of 373 blood samples for ABO/Rh typing and 303 cases for unexpected antibody screening were collected. The IH-1000 was compared to the manual tube and slide methods for ABO/Rh typing and to the microcolumn agglutination method (DiaMed-ID system) for antibody screening. RESULTS: For ABO/Rh typing, concordance rate was 100%. For unexpected antibody screening, positive results for both column agglutination and IH-1000 were observed in 10 cases (four cases of anti-E and c, three of anti-E, one of anti-D, one of anti-M, and one of anti-Xg) and negative results for both were observed in 289 cases. The concordance rate between IH-1000 and column agglutination was 98.7%. Sensitivity and specificity were 90.9% and 99.3%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The automated IH-1000 showed good correlation with the manual tube and slide methods and the microcolumn agglutination method for ABO-RhD typing and irregular antibody screening. The IH-1000 can be used for routine pre-transfusion testing in the blood bank.