ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Antibody screening and identification tests are indispensable tools for protecting patients from acute hemolytic transfusion reaction. The column agglutination method has been widely used because of its simplicity and superiority to other methods for detecting warm antibodies. The purpose of this study was to analyze the frequency, distribution and clinical characteristics of unexpected antibodies found in transfusion candidates at a secondary hospital in Gyeongbuk Province, Korea. METHODS: The antibody screening tests were carried out with 9,275 sera samples using the column agglutination method from July 2009 to September 2011. The antibodies were screened and identified using the DiaMed-ID system (DiaMed, Murten, Switzerland). RESULTS: The positive rate for antibody screening tests was 0.5% (50/9,275). Unexpected antibodies were identified in 36 cases (0.4%). The most frequently detected antibody was anti-Lea in 15 cases (30%), followed by anti-Leb in 10 cases (20%) and anti-E in 8 cases (16%). Antibodies that remain unidentified were detected in 11 cases (22%). CONCLUSION: Compared with previous reports, this study demonstrated that the frequency and distribution of unexpected antibodies were no different than those found in general hospitals. This study may provide data for the frequency and characteristics of unexpected antibodies in a secondary hospital.
Subject(s)
Humans , Agglutination , Antibodies , Blood Group Incompatibility , Hospitals, General , Mass ScreeningABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: For the antibody screening test, the classical LISS tube indirect antiglobulin test has been replaced by the microtube column agglutination system in Korea. This system was first created in 1990 by Lapierre and it is distributed through DiaMed (DiaMed Ag, Cresssier, Morat, Switzerland) around the world. Similar systems, such as Ortho BioVue, have been developed and competed after that. We evaluated a newly developed microtube column agglutination system, DG Gel (Diagnostic Grifols, Barcelona, Spain), and we compare it with the other established systems. METHODS: In a comparative study, a total of 126 samples, including 76 antibody screening positive samples and 50 negative samples, were tested in parallel by the LISS/Coombs card (DiaMed Ag, Cresssier, Morat, Switzerland) and the DG Gel microtube column agglutination system. The positive samples that were proved by the LISS/Coombs card and the DG Gel system were identified by the ID-Dia panel (DiaMed Ag, Cresssier, Morat, Switzerland) and Identisera Diana (Diagnostic Grifols, Barcelona, Spain). Discrepant samples were rechecked with I, II and III cells that were supplied by the panel of the Korea Red Cross Blood Center. RESULTS: Among the 126 samples, the DG Gel antibody screening system showed 98.7% (75/76) sensitivity and 100% (50/50) specificity. We obtained concordant results in 75 samples (98.7%) and discrepant results in one sample (1.32%) between the DG Gel and DiaMed-ID for antibody identification. CONCLUSION: Both the microtube column agglutination systems work well and showed high estimated sensitivity and specificity with high concordance. Therefore, the DG gel microtube column agglutination system can be used with good results.
