Search

A recently introduced system for antibody detection (ReACT) consists of affinity columns (AFC) that contain protein A and protein G-coated agarose. We compared the ReACT system to a conventional tube low-ionic-strength saline antiglobulin test (LISS-AGT). We selected 100 LISS-AGT positive samples with clinically important and benign antibodies of varying strengths and 130 LISS-AGT negative samples to evaluate by the AFC method. AFC tests were positive with all 84 clinically important antibodies, including 36 antibodies that reacted <= 1+ at LISS-AGT (0% falsely negative). Eleven of 16 (69%) clinically benign antibodies reacted by AFC. Five samples (2 anti-Sda, 2 anti-I, and 1 inconclusive) were negative by AFC. AFC tests were negative with all 130 samples that were negative by LISS-AGT (0% falsely positive). The AFC method showed results comparable with results obtained with a conventional tube LISS-AGT for detection of clinically important antibodies. Some unwanted, clinically benign antibodies may not be detected by the AFC method.

We evaluated the performance of the Inverness Blood Grouping System (IBG Systems, Inc., Laytonsville, MD) for the ABO and D red cell grouping of patients' samples. The IBG System is a semiautomated microplate device for blood grouping and antibody detection We tested 2,051 samples using the IBG System and by manual grouping techniques. In no instance did the IBG System give a final ABO interpretation different from the final manual technique. For three samples, the JBG System's ABO interpretation was different from the manual interpretation. An error in interpretation by the technologist performing the manual testing was responsible for the discrepancies. The IBG System identified one sample as D-positive that was grouped as D-negative by manual testing. The patient's sample had been previously grouped manually as a weak D. Au other D results were in agreement. The IBG System provided ABO interpretatinns without technologist's intervention on 1,765 (86.1%) of the samples. In 153 (7.5%) of the samples, a single, equivocal reaction required visual inspection, but no repeat testing was necessary. In 133 (6.5%) of the samples, either repeat testing or reliance on only the manual results was required for final ABO group interpretation. The IBG System is a reliable and efficient alternative to manual techniques for ABO and D grouping of patients' samples.