INITIAL STUDY ON INCOMPATIBLE CROSSMATCH CAUSES AND COMMENTS ON SOME PROS AND CONS OF GELCARD METHOD PERFORMED ON ACROSS SYSTEM AT THE DEPARTMENT OF LABORATORY OF CAN THO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: The performance of crossmatch is mandatory to ensure safety and effectiveness of blood transfusion. The Department of Laboratory has implemented gelcard technique by using the Across system since October 2020; we therefore conducted this study to review some of its advantages. Objectives: Determine the rate and causes of incompatible blood crossmatch and comment on some advantages and disadvantages of gelcard method performed on the Across system - DiaPro compared to the conventional tube method at our hospital. Materials and methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study on 39 patients who received red blood cell transfusions and were performed a 3-stage crossmatch by both gelcard and tube method. Results: 1/39 patients (2,56%) presented mismatched cross-reaction; the cause was due to the presence of abnormal red blood cells antibodies. The two methods’ results were consistent with each other in 100% of cases. The mean time to perform gelcard technique was 30,1 ± 2,1 minutes, significantly shorter than the tube technique with 60,4 ± 12,3 minutes (p < 0,05); the mean storage time for retrieval of gelcard technique was 5 ± 0,56 days, which of tube technique was just maximally 1 day (p < 0,05). Conclusions: The rate of patients with mismatched cross-reactivity accounts for 2,56% and 100% is related to the abnormal red cells antibodies; the gelcard method has shown advantages over the conventional tube method.
Keywords
Gelcard technique, gel method, conventional tube technique, crossmatch
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
2. Bộ Y tế (2017), Quyết định số 3336/QĐ-BYT ngày 20/07/2017 về Hướng dẫn quy trình kỹ thuật Huyết học-Truyền máu-Miễn dịch-Di truyền-Sinh học phân tử.
3. Đỗ Trung Phấn (2013), Kỹ thuật Huyết học và Truyền máu ứng dụng trong lâm sàng, NXB Y học, trang 329-330.
4. Nguyễn Long Quốc, Nguyễn Trung Kiên (2019), Bước đầu định danh kháng thể bất thường kháng hồng cầu và đánh giá kết quả truyền khối hồng cầu ở bệnh nhân thalassemia, Tạp chí Y Dược học Cần Thơ, số 22-29/2019, trang 194-199.
5. John W. Adamson (2008), The Anemia of Inflammation/Malignancy: Mechanisms and Management, Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program (2008), 2008 (1), pp. 159-165.
6. Barbara J Bain (2017), Dacie and Lewis Practical Haematology, 12th Ed, Elsevier Churchill Living Stone, pp. 472-494.
7. Bhattacharya P, Samanta E, Afroza N, Naik A, Biswas R (2018), An approach to incompatible cross-matched red cells: Our experience in a major regional blood transfusion center at Kolkata, Eastern India, Asian J Transfus Sci 2018; 12, pp. 51-56.
8. D A Derr, S J Dickerson, E A Steiner (1998), Implementation of gel column technology, including comparative testing of Ortho ID-MTS with standard polyethylene glycol tube tests, Immunohematology 1998; 14(2), pp. 72-74.
9. Michael F. Murphy, David J. Roberts and Mark H. Yazer (2017), Practical Transfusion Medicine, 5th Ed, Wiley, pp. 58-68.
10. Novaretti MCZ, Jens ES, et al. (2000), Comparison of tube and gel technique for antibody identification, Immunohaematology 2000; 16, pp. 138-141.
11. Col D Swarup, Brig PS Dhot et al (2007), Comparative Study of Blood Cross Matching Using Conventional Tube and Gel Method, MJAFI 2008; 64, pp. 129-130.
12. Vidushi, Sidhu M, Shah SN. (2020), Evaluation of incompatible crossmatch, Glob J Transfus Med 2020; 5, pp. 68-72.