The Frequency of Unexpected Antibodies and Clinical Characteristics of Transfusion Candidates in a General Hospital During the Past 12 Years.
- Author:
Saeam SHIN
1
;
Yangsoon LEE
;
Kwang Kuk YOON
;
Yong Ah KIM
Author Information
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea. yangsoon@yuhs.ac
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Unexpected antibody;
Antibody screening test;
Antibody identification test
- MeSH:
Antibodies;
Autoantibodies;
Blood Group Incompatibility;
Hospitals, General;
Humans;
Isoantibodies;
Mass Screening
- From:Journal of Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance
2012;34(2):99-105
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Unexpected antibodies are an important cause of hemolytic transfusion reaction. Thus, unexpected antibody screening and identification tests should be performed before every transfusion. We evaluated the frequency and distribution of unexpected antibodies and the clinical characteristics of patients in a Korean secondary general hospital with 745 beds in the past 12 years. METHODS: Between March 2000 and October 2011, unexpected antibody screening and an identification test using the Bio-Rad ID-System (Bio-Rad, USA) were performed in 72,600 patients. RESULTS: Of the 72,600 patients, 467 (0.64%) showed positive results for antibody screening tests. Among them, alloantibodies were identified in 324 (69.4%) patients and the types of alloantibodies were not identified in 64 (13.7%) patients. Autoantibodies were detected in 71 (15.2%) patients and panagglutination reactions were detected in 8 (1.7%). Of the 467 cases, 164 (35.1%) had a history of transfusion in our hospital. Among the 324 patients in whom alloantibodies were identified, anti-E (37.3%), anti-Lea (16.7%), anti-E and anti-c (14.8%), anti-C and anti-e (5.6%), anti-Leb (4.9%), anti-D (4.6%), anti-Jka (3.1%), anti-S (2.5%), and anti-M (1.9%) were detected. In 41 of the 324 (12.7%) of these patients, the types of antibodies were identified with the NaCl/Enzyme gel test but not with the LISS/Coombs gel test. CONCLUSIONS: Among the 467 patients, 130 (27.8%) in whom unexpected antibodies were detected, were scheduled for surgery. Because 101 of these 130 patients (77.7%) were unimmunized, unexpected antibody screening may be important in secondary hospitals with patients who do not have a detailed transfusion history. We identified Rh, P, and Lewis group antibodies more efficiently with a combination of the LISS/Coombs gel test and the NaCl/Enzyme gel test.
