The Suitability of Compatibility Test Results with Gel Method between Diagnostic Grifols Gel Coombs and Diamed-Identification
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24293/ijcpml.v27i1.1605Keywords:
Compatibility test, gel method, diagnostic Grifols Gel Coombs, Diamed-IdentificationAbstract
A compatibility test as part of a pre-transfusion test is mandatory to ensure blood compatibility between patients and donors. Diamed-ID as the first gel-based product is commonly used as a reference for the compatibility test. The presence of new products such as DG Gel Coombs encourages research to compare them with reference methods. This study aimed to analyze the suitability of DG Gel Coombs to Diamed-ID in the compatibility test with the same sample. This cross-sectional analytic observational study was conducted during November 2017-February 2018 at the Blood Transfusion Unit Dr. Soetomo Hospital, Surabaya using blood samples (n=40), which met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Simultaneous testing of the two products was according to the manufacturing requirements of each product (using different LISS reagents for red blood cell suspensions and centrifugation arrangements). The suitability of results was tested with Cohen's kappa and significant differences with McNemar. There was a minimum suitability of DG Gel Coombs to Diamed-ID for major compatibility tests, κ 0.307 (95% CI: -0.029-0.643), significance 0.007 (p < 0.05) and moderate for minor, κ 0,678 (95% CI: 0.454-0.903), significance <0.0001 (p < 0.05). McNemar's significance was 0.016 (p < 0.05) for major compatibility test and 0.031 (p < 0.05) for minor. Referring to Diamed-ID's results, false negatives were found on DG Gel Coombs for major compatibility tests (n=7) and minor (n=6). The suitability of results from DG Gel Coombs and Diamed-ID is not strong for compatibility testing.
Downloads
References
Blanchet O, Bonte L, Bouhabib H, Chaillet P. Blood transfusion. A manual for doctors, nurses, and
laboratory technicians. Paris, Medecins, Sans Frontieres, 2010; 11-64.
Maclvor D, Yazer M. Transfusion support in sickle cell anemia. Transfusion Medicine Update, Institute for Transfusion Medicine, 2007; 1-2.
Ozsoylu S. ABC of blood transfusion in patients with thalassemia major. Medical Journal of Islamic World Academy of Sciences, 2014; 22(4): 175-6.
UTDRS RSUD Dr Soetomo. Data permintaan darah transfusi dan komponennya. Surabaya, UTDRS RSUD Dr Soetomo, 2016.
Quienly E. Immunohematology principles and rd practice. 3 Ed., Washington DC, Lippincot Williams &
Wilkins, 2011; 107-18.
Norfolk D. Handbook of transfusion medicine. 5 Ed., United Kingdom Blood Service,TSO, 2013; 5-11.
Lane D. Pre-transfusion testing. Clinical guide to transfusion. Canadian Blood Service, 2014; 1-3.
Delaney M, Wendel S, Bercovitz RS, Cid J, Cohn C, et al. Transfusion reactions: Prevention, diagnosis, and treatment. The Lancet, 2016; 388(10061): 2825-36.
Westhoff C. Red cell immunology and compatibility testing. Rossi's principle transfusion. 5 Ed., New York, John Wiley & Son, 2016; 193-205.
th 10. McCullough J. Transfusion medicine. 4 Ed., John Wiley & Son, 2017; 220-3.
EPHTI. The crossmatch (compatibility testing). s t In: Immunohaemotology. 1 Ed., Misganaw
Birhaneselassie, 2004; 79-84.
Malyska H, Weiland D. The gel test. Laboratory Medicine, 1994; 25(2): 81-5.
Cid J, Nogues N, Montero R, Hurtado M, Briega A, Parra R. Comparison of three microtube column
agglutination systems for antibody screening: DG Gel, DiaMed-ID and Ortho BioVue. Transfusion Medicine, 2006; 16(2): 131-6.
Swarup D, Dhot P, Kotwal J, Verma A. Comparative study of blood cross matching using conventional
tube and gel method. MJAFI, 2008; (64): 129-30.
Mehta N, Chakraborty I, Rane M, Ambre V. Verification of column agglutination technology with conventional tube technology for naturally occurring antibody titration. Global Journal of Transfusion Medicine, 2016; 1(2): 46.
Taylor J, Hyare J, Stelfox P, Williams M, Lees R, Maley M. Multi-centre evaluation of pre-transfusional routine tests using 8-column format gel cards (DG Gel®). Transfusion Medicine, 2011; 21(2): 90-8.
Hustinx H, Munger E, Lejon Crottet S. Comparison of sensitivity and specificity of the Bio-Rad ID Cards LISS/Coombs with the Grifols Gel Coombs cards in a manual approach. Switzerland, Interregional
Transfusion SRC Berne, 2016; 1.
Watkins J. Introduction to the science of statistics: From theory to implementation. Preelimina, 2005;
-182,333-352.
Zammit V. A comparative study between antiglobulin crossmatch and type and screen procedures for compatibility testing. B.Sc. (Hons.) in Health Science, 2004; 52-94.
Diamed AG. Diamed-ID microtyping system ID Card "LISS/Coombs" indirect and direct antiglobulin test. Product Identification No 50531. Switzerland, Diamed AG, 2008; 13-22.
Diagnostic Grifols. DG Gel Coombs. Katalog No 031222. Spain, Diagnostic Grifols, 2010; 1-2.
McHugh M. Interrater reliability: The kappa statistic. Biochemia Medica, 2012; 22(3): 276-82.
Grey D, Connolly M, Erber W. Comparison of low ionic diluents for use with the Diamed antiglobulin test. Transfusion Medicine, 2002; 12: 63-9.
Majekodunmi S. A review on centrifugation in the pharmaceutical industry. American Journal of
Biomedical Engineering, 2015; 5(2): 67-78.
Downloads
Submitted
Accepted
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 INDONESIAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PATHOLOGY AND MEDICAL LABORATORY
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.