» Articles » PMID: 19709392

Validation of a Hospital-laboratory Workstation for Immunohematologic Methods

Overview
Journal Transfusion
Specialty Hematology
Date 2009 Aug 28
PMID 19709392
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The FREELYS Nano system (Diagast) is a manual workstation for ABO/D grouping, Rh phenotyping, K typing, and antibody screening (ABS) for immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies only and works with the erythrocyte-magnetized technology (EMT). The principle of EMT is based on magnetization of red blood cells and avoids centrifugation and washing steps.

Study Design And Methods: A total of 304 samples were tested with our routine blood bank methods, 100 samples for ABO/D grouping, 196 samples (100 at first evaluation, 96 at second evaluation) for Rh phenotyping and K typing (PK7200, Olympus), and 108 samples for ABS (DiaMed). All samples were tested in parallel with the FREELYS Nano.

Results: We found a 100% concordance between the observed (FREELYS Nano) and the expected (Olympus PK7200) results for ABO/D grouping in all 100 samples. For Rh phenotyping and K tests, in 24 of 100 samples false-positive reactions were observed in the first evaluation by the FREELYS Nano. After changing the test kit batch for Rh phenotyping by the manufacturer, a complete concordance in Rh phenotyping and K tests was observed in a second evaluation. For ABS, the FREELYS Nano showed in 4 of 108 samples (3.7%) false-negative reactions for IgG antibodies (two anti-K, one anti-E, one anti-C(w)), and one (0.9%) false-positive reaction.

Conclusions: The FREELYS Nano is reliably suited to ABO/D grouping, Rh phenotyping, and K testing. The rate of false-negative reactions for IgG antibodies should be reduced.

Citing Articles

Blood Group Testing.

Li H, Guo K Front Med (Lausanne). 2022; 9:827619.

PMID: 35223922 PMC: 8873177. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2022.827619.


Performance Evaluation of Automated Immunohematology Analyzer IH-500 for Blood Bank Testing.

Park S, Kim J, Lim J, Jeong J, Lee S Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus. 2019; 35(4):731-735.

PMID: 31741629 PMC: 6825066. DOI: 10.1007/s12288-019-01127-4.


Comparison Between Conventional and Automated Techniques for Blood Grouping and Crossmatching: Experience from a Tertiary Care Centre.

Bhagwat S, Sharma J, Jose J, Modi C J Lab Physicians. 2015; 7(2):96-102.

PMID: 26417159 PMC: 4559636. DOI: 10.4103/0974-2727.163130.


Automation in Blood Centre: Its impact on Blood Safety.

Gupte S Asian J Transfus Sci. 2015; 9(Suppl 1):S6-S10.

PMID: 26097331 PMC: 4455106. DOI: 10.4103/0973-6247.157016.


Automation in immunohematology.

Bajpai M, Kaur R, Gupta E Asian J Transfus Sci. 2012; 6(2):140-4.

PMID: 22988378 PMC: 3439752. DOI: 10.4103/0973-6247.98914.