Comparison of RhD Typing Results by Serology and Molecular Methods

被引：2

作者：

Gammon, Richard R. ^{[1
]}

Conceicao, Michelle ^{[2
]}

Benitez, Nancy ^{[3
]}

Bright, Frieda ^{[4
]}

Counts, Kelley ^{[5
]}

Resto, Claribel ^{[3
]}

Rexer, Karl ^{[5
,6
]}

机构：

[1] OneBlood, Sci Med Tech Direct, Orlando, FL 32806 USA

[2] OneBlood, Immunohematol Reference Lab, St Petersburg, FL USA

[3] OneBlood, Immunohematol Reference Lab, Ft Lauderdale, FL USA

[4] OneBlood, Centralized Transfus Serv, St Petersburg, FL USA

[5] OneBlood, Informat Technol Adm, St Petersburg, FL USA

[6] Rexer Analyt, Winchester, MA USA

来源：

LABORATORY MEDICINE | 2023年 / 54卷 / 02期

关键词：

serology; molecular; D-alloimmunization; immunohematology reference laboratory; turnaround time; concordance; TRANSFUSION STRATEGY; WEAK;

D O I：

10.1093/labmed/lmac097

中图分类号：

R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];

学科分类号：

1001 ;

摘要：

Objective Molecular testing determines D antigen status when abnormal serologic results are observed. Molecular testing is routinely batched, resulting in longer turnaround time for abnormal D status resolution. During the interim, obstetric patients with questionable/uninterpretable and weak D typing results by serology, per the immunohematology reference laboratory (IRL) policy, will receive RhD negative blood. This study aimed to determine whether serology results achieved a concordance. Methods Six hospitals provided samples to the IRL (first IRL) for RhD status by DNA. De-identified samples were sent for serology RhD (second IRL). A concordance of >= 80% was acceptable. Results Forty-nine samples were evaluated. Results were concordant (65.3% [32/49]) and discordant (34.7% [17/49]). This is significantly lower than clinically acceptable 80% (z = 2.57, P < .05). The turnaround-time was 3.0 hours for serology and 4.4 days for molecular evaluation. Conclusion Due to a low concordance, serology could not be used in place of molecular testing.

引用

页码：190 / 192

页数：3

共 9 条

[1]

Flegel WA, 2019, BLOOD TRANSFUS-ITALY, V17, P89, DOI [10.2450/2018.0259-18, 10.2450/2018.0059-18]

[2] Maintaining adequate donations and a sustainable blood supply: Lessons learned [J].

Gammon, Richard R. ;

Rosenbaum, Lizabeth ;

Cooke, Rhonda ;

Friedman, Mark ;

Rockwood, Linda ;

Nichols, Tracie ;

Vossoughi, Sarah .

TRANSFUSION, 2021, 61 (01) :294-302

[3] Financial implications of RHD genotyping of pregnant women with a serologic weak D phenotype [J].

Kacker, Seema ;

Vassallo, Ralph ;

Keller, Margaret A. ;

Westhoff, Connie M. ;

Frick, Kevin D. ;

Sandler, S. Gerald ;

Tobian, Aaron A. R. .

TRANSFUSION, 2015, 55 (09) :2095-2103

[4]

Mikulic M., 2020, Statista

[5] Transfusion strategy for weak D Type 4.0 based on RHD alleles and RH haplotypes in Tunisia [J].

Ouchari, Mouna ;

Srivastava, Kshitij ;

Romdhane, Houda ;

Yacoub, Saloua Jemni ;

Flegel, Willy Albert .

TRANSFUSION, 2018, 58 (02) :306-312

[6]

Peyrard T., 2020, TECHNICAL MANUAL

[7] It's time to phase in RHD genotyping for patients with a serologic weak D phenotype [J].

Sandler, S. Gerald ;

Flegel, Willy A. ;

Westhoff, Connie M. ;

Denomme, Gregory A. ;

Delaney, Meghan ;

Keller, Margaret A. ;

Johnson, Susan T. ;

Katz, Louis ;

Queenan, John T. ;

Vassallo, Ralph R. ;

Simon, Clayton D. .

TRANSFUSION, 2015, 55 (03) :680-689

[8] Supplemental findings from the National Blood Collection and Utilization Surveys, 2013 and 2015 [J].

Sapiano, Mathew R. P. ;

Savinkina, Alexandra A. ;

Ellingson, Katherine D. ;

Haass, Kathryn A. ;

Baker, Misha L. ;

Henry, Richard A. ;

Berger, James J. ;

Kuehnert, Matthew J. ;

Basavaraju, Sridhar V. .

TRANSFUSION, 2017, 57 :1599-1624

[9] Experience with RHD*weak D type 4.0 in the USA [J].

Westhoff, Connie M. ;

Nance, Sandra ;

Lomas-Francis, Christine ;

Keller, Margaret ;

Chou, Stella T. .

BLOOD TRANSFUSION, 2019, 17 (02) :91-93

← 1 →