Rare Blood Groups in ABO, Rh, Kell Systems - Biological and Clinical Significance.

Background: The frequency of ABO, Rh and Kell blood group antigens differs among populations of different ethnic ancestry. There are low-frequency antigens (<1%) and high-frequency antigens (>90%). A rare blood group is defined as the absence of a high-frequency antigen in the general population, as well as absence of multiple frequent antigens within a single or multiple blood group systems. Aim: To perform red blood cell typing and to calculate the antigen and phenotype frequencies, in order to identify rare blood group donors within the clinically most important АВО, Rh and Kell systems. Material and Methods: АВО, Rh (D, C, E, c, e) and Kell (K) antigen typing was performed using specific monoclonal sera and microplate technique, while Cellano (k) typing was performed with a monoclonal anti-k, antihuman globulin and column agglutination technique. Weak ABO subgroups were determined using the absorption elution method or molecular genotyping (PCR-SSP). Results: ABO antigen frequency is: A (40.89%), O (34.22%), B (16.97%), AB (7.92%) and weak ABO subgroups (0, 009 %). The established genotypes were AxO1 (0, 0026%) and AxB (0, 001%). Rh antigen frequency is: D (85.79%), C (71.7%), c (76.0%), E (26.0%) and е (97.95%). The most common Rh pheno-type is the DCcee (32.7%) while the rarest phenotype is the DCCEE phenotype (0. 003%). The prevalence of K and k antigen is 7.5% and 99.94%, respectively. The frequency of the rare phenotype K+k- is 0.06%. Conclusion: Large scale phenotyping of blood group antigens enables the identification of blood donors with rare blood groups for patients with rare phenotypes or with antibodies to high-frequency antigens and to frequent antigens within one or more blood group systems.

Two Clinical Cases of Anti-Di(b) with Di(a+b-) Phenotypes: Practical Need for Rare Blood Donor Registry Program in Korea

Here, we report two cases of identified anti-Di(b) antibodies with rare Di(a+b−) blood types from two different hospitals in Korea. Di(b) mismatched transfusion could cause a hemolytic transfusion reaction. However, it is extremely difficult to find compatible blood for patients with such a rare blood type. In this regard, we concluded that national level rare donor registry program, wherein rare blood types are indexed, needs to be established. Moreover, laboratory medicine specialists at each hospital should encourage donor registration and family testing through education for helping patients with rare blood types. These efforts will help establish a system that guarantees safe blood transfusion for patients.

Too Many Blood Donors - Response Bias in the Swiss Health Survey 2012.

BACKGROUND: Data on blood donor status obtained from general surveys and health interview surveys have been widely used. However, the integrity of data on self-reported blood donor status from surveys may be threatened by sampling and non-sampling error. Our study aimed to compare self-reported blood donors (including one-time as well as regular donors) from the Swiss Health Survey 2012 (SHS) with register-based blood donors recorded by blood establishments and evaluate the direction and magnitude of bias in the SHS. METHODS: We compared population-weighted SHS point estimates of the number of blood donors with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals to the respective figures from blood donor registries (birth cohorts 1978-1993) and estimates of donors based on period donor tables derived from blood donor registries (birth cohorts 1920-1993). RESULTS: In the birth cohorts 1978-1993, the SHS-predicted number of donors was 1.8 times higher than the respective number of donors based on registry data. Adjusting for foreign and naturalized Swiss nationals that immigrated after their 18th birthday, the SHS overall predicted number of donors was 1.6 times higher. Similarly, SHS estimates for the 1920-1993 birth cohorts were 2.4 and 2.1 times higher as compared to register-based estimates. Generally, the differences between SHS and register-based donors were more pronounced in men than in women. CONCLUSION: Self-reported blood donor status in the SHS is biased. Estimates of blood donors are substantially higher than respective estimates based on blood donor registries.