Cargando…

Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Conventional tube technique (CTT) has been the mainstay for antibody detection in pretransfusion testing. There have been rapid technological advances in blood banking and methodology of crossmatch has been modified to improve the sensitivity of these tests and to enable a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garg, Sachin, Saini, Nishant, Bedi, Ravneet Kaur, Basu, Sabita
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28367023
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.199627
_version_ 1782509628309897216
author Garg, Sachin
Saini, Nishant
Bedi, Ravneet Kaur
Basu, Sabita
author_facet Garg, Sachin
Saini, Nishant
Bedi, Ravneet Kaur
Basu, Sabita
author_sort Garg, Sachin
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Conventional tube technique (CTT) has been the mainstay for antibody detection in pretransfusion testing. There have been rapid technological advances in blood banking and methodology of crossmatch has been modified to improve the sensitivity of these tests and to enable automation. This study was done to compare the efficacy of three crossmatch techniques: CTT, tube low-ionic-strength-saline indirect antiglobulin test (tube LISS-IAT), and micro column technology (MCT) used in the blood bank serology laboratory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 150 samples from patients who had received two or more transfusions on two different occasions (with at least 72 h between two transfusions) were subjected to cross match by three different techniques – CTT, LISS-IAT, and MCT. RESULTS: A total of 16 cases with antibodies were identified in 150 patients. Out of 16 cases, 14 were clinically significant (anti-c = 5, anti-K = 4, anti-E = 2, anti-S = 2, anti-Jk(a) = 1) and 2 nonclinically significant antibody cases (anti-Le(a)). MCT detected all the 14 clinically significant antibody cases and no case of nonclinically significant antibody. Tube LISS-IAT detected 14 antibody cases including 2 cases of non-clinically significant antibody but failed to detect 1 case of anti-c and the only case of anti-Jk(a). CTT detected only 10 antibody cases including 2 cases of non-clinically significant antibody and but failed to detect 3 cases of anti-c, 1 case of anti-K, 1 case of anti-E, and the only case of anti-Jk(a). CONCLUSION: MCT was found to be most efficacious when compared to CTT and tube LISS-IAT in detecting clinically significant red cell antibodies; although MCT missed 2 cases of Le(a) antibody which were detected by CTT and LISS-IAT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5320888
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-53208882017-04-01 Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection Garg, Sachin Saini, Nishant Bedi, Ravneet Kaur Basu, Sabita J Lab Physicians Original Article BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Conventional tube technique (CTT) has been the mainstay for antibody detection in pretransfusion testing. There have been rapid technological advances in blood banking and methodology of crossmatch has been modified to improve the sensitivity of these tests and to enable automation. This study was done to compare the efficacy of three crossmatch techniques: CTT, tube low-ionic-strength-saline indirect antiglobulin test (tube LISS-IAT), and micro column technology (MCT) used in the blood bank serology laboratory. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective study, 150 samples from patients who had received two or more transfusions on two different occasions (with at least 72 h between two transfusions) were subjected to cross match by three different techniques – CTT, LISS-IAT, and MCT. RESULTS: A total of 16 cases with antibodies were identified in 150 patients. Out of 16 cases, 14 were clinically significant (anti-c = 5, anti-K = 4, anti-E = 2, anti-S = 2, anti-Jk(a) = 1) and 2 nonclinically significant antibody cases (anti-Le(a)). MCT detected all the 14 clinically significant antibody cases and no case of nonclinically significant antibody. Tube LISS-IAT detected 14 antibody cases including 2 cases of non-clinically significant antibody but failed to detect 1 case of anti-c and the only case of anti-Jk(a). CTT detected only 10 antibody cases including 2 cases of non-clinically significant antibody and but failed to detect 3 cases of anti-c, 1 case of anti-K, 1 case of anti-E, and the only case of anti-Jk(a). CONCLUSION: MCT was found to be most efficacious when compared to CTT and tube LISS-IAT in detecting clinically significant red cell antibodies; although MCT missed 2 cases of Le(a) antibody which were detected by CTT and LISS-IAT. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2017 /pmc/articles/PMC5320888/ /pubmed/28367023 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.199627 Text en Copyright: © 2017 Journal of Laboratory Physicians http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Garg, Sachin
Saini, Nishant
Bedi, Ravneet Kaur
Basu, Sabita
Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
title Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
title_full Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
title_fullStr Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
title_short Comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
title_sort comparison of micro column technology with conventional tube methods for antibody detection
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5320888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28367023
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-2727.199627
work_keys_str_mv AT gargsachin comparisonofmicrocolumntechnologywithconventionaltubemethodsforantibodydetection
AT saininishant comparisonofmicrocolumntechnologywithconventionaltubemethodsforantibodydetection
AT bediravneetkaur comparisonofmicrocolumntechnologywithconventionaltubemethodsforantibodydetection
AT basusabita comparisonofmicrocolumntechnologywithconventionaltubemethodsforantibodydetection