Comparison of conventional tube test with diamed gel microcolumn assay for anti-D titration

被引:19
|
作者
Novaretti, MCZ
Jens, E
Pagliarini, T
Bonifácio, SL
Dorlhiac-Llacer, PE
Chamone, DAF
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Dept Hematol, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[2] Fdn Pro Sangue Hemoctr Sao Paulo, Immunohematol Dept, Sao Paulo, Brazil
来源
CLINICAL AND LABORATORY HAEMATOLOGY | 2003年 / 25卷 / 05期
关键词
gel test; antibody titration; anti-D; haemolytic disease of the newborn; alloantibodies;
D O I
10.1046/j.1365-2257.2003.00540.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Anti-D titration is the first step in the evaluation of the RhD-sensitized patient. Traditionally, anti-D titration has been performed by tube agglutination. Gel microcolumn assay is a method that has gained widespread usage throughout the world, mainly for ABO/Rh typing, unexpected antibody screening and direct antiglobulin tests. As gel assay has become widely used as a routine method to detect red blood cell alloantibodies, a critical anti-D titer needs to be established. Seventy-nine known blood samples with anti-D (titers 1-32) were titrated simultaneously by the conventional tube test and the gel microcolumn assay. Red blood cells (R(o)r phenotype) were used, with a final concentration of 3% for tube and 0.8% for gel. Serial twofold dilutions (2-2.048) were prepared for each technique, followed by reading in antiglobulin phase. Anti-D titration in the gel microcolumn assay showed significantly higher titers (mean 3.4-fold) than the conventional tube test in all samples studied. Based on these data, it was not possible to determine a critical titer for anti-D titration by the gel microcolumn assay.
引用
收藏
页码:311 / 315
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison of a gel microcolumn assay with the conventional tube test for red blood cell alloantibody titration
    Finck, Rachel
    Lui-Deguzman, Carrie
    Teng, Shih-Mao
    Davis, Rebecca
    Yuan, Shan
    TRANSFUSION, 2013, 53 (04) : 811 - 815
  • [2] Antibodies titration for immunized pregnant women: conventional tube test or gel microcolumn assay
    Vuk, Tomislav
    Cipek, Vladimir
    Hecimovic, Ana
    Jukic, Irena
    TRANSFUSION, 2014, 54 (04) : 1200 - 1202
  • [3] COMPARISION OF MICROCOLUMN GEL ASSAY AND TUBE TEST FOR IDENTIFICATION OF ANTI-D ANTIBODY AMONG RH NEGATIVE PREGNANTWOMEN IN NEPAL
    Silwal, Pramita
    Paudel, Yuba Raj
    EXPERIMENTAL HEMATOLOGY, 2018, 64 : S104 - S104
  • [4] Comparison of conventional tube test technique and gel microcolumn assay for direct antiglobulin test: A large study
    Novaretti, MCZ
    Jens, E
    Pagliarini, T
    Bonifacio, SL
    Dorlhiac-Llacer, PE
    Chamone, DAF
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL LABORATORY ANALYSIS, 2004, 18 (05) : 255 - 258
  • [5] Comparison of prenatal anti-D titration testing by gel and tube methods: A review of the literature
    Lieberman, Lani
    Andrews, Jennifer
    Evans, Michael D.
    Cohn, Claudia S.
    TRANSFUSION, 2021, 61 (06) : 1749 - 1756
  • [6] Comparison of Conventional Tube Test and Gel Microcolumn Assay for Red Blood Cell Alloantibody Titer Determinations
    Finck, R. H.
    Lui, C.
    Davis, R.
    Yuan, S.
    TRANSFUSION, 2011, 51 : 179A - 179A
  • [7] Can anti-D titration be performed in gel-test?
    Novaretti, MC
    Jens, E
    Bonifacio, SL
    Dorlhiac-Llacer, PE
    Chamone, DA
    TRANSFUSION, 2001, 41 (09) : 111S - 111S
  • [8] COMPARISON OF GEL TEST AND CONVENTIONAL TUBE TEST FOR ANTIBODY DETECTION AND TITRATION IN D-NEGATIVE PREGNANT WOMEN
    Marwaha, N.
    Thakur, M. K.
    Thakral, B.
    Saluja, K.
    Saha, S. C.
    VOX SANGUINIS, 2012, 103 : 232 - 233
  • [9] Validation of Gel Microcolumn Assay for Red Cell Alloantibody Titration by Correlating with Conventional Tube Testing and Clinical Outcome in Rh Negative Antenatal Cases
    Dubey, Rounak
    Mallhi, Rajeev S.
    Asthana, Bhushan
    TRANSFUSION, 2018, 58 : 190A - 190A
  • [10] ANTI-D IMMUNOGLOBULIN PREPARATIONS - STABILITY OF ANTI-D CONCENTRATIONS AND ERROR OF ASSAY OF ANTI-D
    HUGHESJONES, NC
    HUNT, VA
    MAYCOCK, WDA
    WESLEY, ED
    VALLET, L
    VOX SANGUINIS, 1978, 35 (1-2) : 100 - 104