Premium
Antibody identification using both automated solid‐phase red cell adherence assay and a tube polyethylene glycol antiglobulin method
Author(s) -
Yamada Chisa,
SerranoRahman Leana,
Vasovic Ljiljana V.,
Mohandas Kala,
Uehlinger Joan
Publication year - 2008
Publication title -
transfusion
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.045
H-Index - 132
eISSN - 1537-2995
pISSN - 0041-1132
DOI - 10.1111/j.1537-2995.2008.01736.x
Subject(s) - peg ratio , polyethylene glycol , antibody , galileo (satellite navigation) , chromatography , medicine , chemistry , immunology , biochemistry , geodesy , finance , economics , geography
BACKGROUND: Because antibody identification is labor‐intensive, facilities with high volume and/or marginal technical support could benefit from partial automation. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: After a validation study of automated solid‐phase red cell (RBC) adherence assay (SPRCA; Galileo, Immucor) compared to tube polyethylene glycol antiglobulin antibody identification method (t‐PEG), we evaluated Galileo followed by select RBC panels by t‐PEG. Of 298 consecutive samples in which antibody identifications were performed in a 2‐month period, 160 samples were examined by both Galileo and t‐PEG. RESULTS: There were concordant results between Galileo and t‐PEG in 120 of 160 (75%) samples including cases with identical alloantibody identification (n = 99), panagglutinin (n = 9), and negative results (n = 12). Of the samples in which alloantibodies were identified, 99 of 108 (91.7%) were identical. In 9 samples with discrepant antibody identifications, 2 samples showed alloantibody specificity by Galileo (possible anti‐K and anti‐Jk b ) but were negative by t‐PEG. These antibodies were identifiable by t‐PEG in subsequent samples. One sample showed anti‐E by Galileo, while t‐PEG revealed anti‐Fy a and ‐E. Five samples showed alloantibody specificity by t‐PEG and nonspecific reactivity or panagglutinin by Galileo. These included samples with anti‐C (n = 2), anti‐E (n = 2), and anti‐Fy a (n = 1). One sample showed anti‐E by t‐PEG but was negative by Galileo. Galileo found a panagglutinin in 23 samples and nonspecific reactivity in 22 samples, whereas t‐PEG found a panagglutinin in 12 samples but no nonspecific reactivity. CONCLUSIONS: Automated Galileo solid‐phase red cell adherence assay can be a useful adjunct for antibody identification, although it detects more nonspecific reactivity than does t‐PEG.