Retrospective analysis of molecular biology mechanism of ABO blood group typing discrepancy among blood donors in Jinan blood station.

BACKGROUND: To accurately identify ABO blood typing in pre-transfusion testing is very important to ensure blood transfusion safely, which is a major responsibility of blood station. METHODS: Eighty-one blood donors samples with ABO blood group typing discrepancy was collected among 61952 donor samples in our blood station from January 2019 to July 2020. Blood group serological method was used to detect ABO blood group. DNA Sequencing was used to determine the genotype. The antibody screening test detects antibodies other than ABO. RESULTS: In total, 61,952 donor samples were analysed for ABO typing discrepancies. The incidence among blood donors was 0.13% (81/61952). The most common reason of ABO typing discrepancies was due to specific antibody or non-specific agglutination (54.32%, 44/81), mainly anti-M antibody, cold autoantibody, anti-D antibody, anti-N antibody and anti-Lea antibody. The major cause of forward typing discrepancies among blood donors was ABO subgroups (25.93%, 21/81), including 10 cases of A subtype (1 case of A2, 2 cases of A3, 2 cases of Ax, 3 cases of AxB, 1 case of Ael, 1 case of Ahm), 6 cases of B subtype (2 cases of B3, 1 case of Bel, 3 cases of AB3), 2 cases of B subtype (A), 1 case of cisAB, and 2 cases of acquired B. The serum antibody was weakened in 16 cases (19.75%). CONCLUSIONS: The blood types should be correctly identified by combining serology with gene sequencing to ensure the safety of clinical blood transfusion, when the forward and reverse typing discrepancies among the blood donors.

[Effect of liraglutide on glucagon secretion in obese type 2 diabetic patients].

Objective: To investigate the effect of liraglutide on glucagon release in obese type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Methods: A multi-center, prospective, and self-comparison study was conducted in four hospitals in Qingdao. Twenty-four patients with T2DM were selected and treated with liraglutide for 12 weeks. Glucagon levels before and after treatment were detected before and 30 min, 60 min and 120 min after meals. Results: After 12 weeks of treatment, the overall level of glucagon decreased, in which the differences in glucagon levels at 30 min [(220±79) ng/L vs. (203±77) ng/L, P<0.05] and 60 min [(248±119) ng/L vs. (203±82)ng/L, P<0.05] reached significance, respectively, comparing to those before treatment. The area under the curve of glucagon after treatment was significantly lower than that before treatment (438±190 vs. 389±153, P<0.05). In contrast, after treatment, the overall level of C-peptide increased, especially the levels at 30 min [(1.53±1.02) nmol/L vs.(2.03±1.29) nmol/L], 60 min [(1.93±1.19) nmol/L vs. (2.48±1.75) nmol/L] and 120 min [(2.36±1.47) nmol/L vs. (2.96±1.84) nmol/L], all P<0.05. The area under C-peptide curve increased significantly (3.6±2.2 vs. 4.6±2.9, P<0.05). Fasting plasma glucose, postprandial 2 h plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin A1c were all lower than before, and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05). Waist circumference and body mass index were significantly lower than before (P<0.05). The amount of insulin used for the treatment decreased by approximately 55.1% compared with that before liraglutide, and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions: Liraglutide inhibits glucagon secretion and lowers blood glucose. It can also reduce body weight, improve islet cell function and reduce insulin use in T2DM.

[An efficacy and safety study of bifidobacterium tetragenous viable bacteria tablets in the treatment of constipation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus].

Objective: The incidence of gastrointestinal symptoms in diabetes is higher than that of non-diabetes. Thus, the aim of the present study was to observe the efficacy and safety of bifidobacterium tetragenous viable bacteria tablets in the treatment of constipation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group-comparison clinical research. The subjects were randomly divided into study group and control group according to 1∶1 ratio by computer generated random number method. The subjects were either treated with bifidobacterium tetragenous viable bacteria tablets (study group) or placebo (control group) for eight weeks, and they were followed up for four weeks without changing foundation therapy for diabetes. The primary outcome was the change of complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs). Results: A total of 234 subjects (the study group:116 cases; the control group: 118 cases) from 7 centers were included in the present study. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the two groups. In the study group, the CSBMs at 0, 2, 4, 8 and 12 weeks were 0.0 (0.0, 1.0) , 1.0 (0.5, 2.0) , 2.0 (1.0, 3.0) , 3.0 (2.0, 3.5) , 2.0 (1.0, 3.0) times per week, respectively, while the CSBMs of the control group at each corresponding weeks were 0.0 (0.0, 1.0) , 1.0 (0.0, 1.5) , 1.0 (0.0, 1.5) , 1.0 (0.0, 2.0) , 1.0 (0.0, 1.5) times per week, respectively. There is significant difference in CSBMs between the two groups (P<0.05). Moreover, after 12 weeks treatment, the CSBMs over spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) ratio in the study group was higher than that in the control group [0.53 (0.40, 0.67) vs 0.33 (0.00,0.50), P=0.048], indicating a more complete evacuation sensation in the study group. More subjects in the study group (66.38%) reached Bristol stool classification of normal criteria than those in the control group (48.31%, P=0.005). There were significantly improvement of bowel function index in the study group [study group 42.7 (33.3, 56.7), control group 60.6 (51.7, 75.7), P<0.000 1]. Furthermore, the symptoms of constipation was improved, and the satisfaction for the treatment was high in the study group. There were no significant differences of the safety indicators between the two groups. Conclusions: Bifidobacterium tetragenous viable bacteria tablets can be used in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and constipation. Compared with placebo, it improves constipation and has no obvious adverse effects.