Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Transfus Med ; 30(4): 263-274, 2020 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32432400

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Alloimmunisation and haemolytic transfusion reactions (HTRs) can occur in patients with sickle cell disease (SCD) despite providing phenotype-matched red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. Variant RBC antigen gene alleles/polymorphisms can lead to discrepancies in serological phenotyping. We evaluated differences between RBC antigen genotyping and phenotyping methods and retrospectively assessed if partial antigen expression may lead to increased risk of alloimmunisation and HTRs in SCD patients at a tertiary centre in Canada. METHODS: RBC antigen phenotyping and genotyping were performed by a reference laboratory on consenting SCD patients. Patient demographic, clinical and transfusion-related data were obtained from a local transfusion registry and chart review after research ethics board approval. RESULTS: A total of 106 SCD patients were enrolled, and 91% (n = 96) showed additional clinically relevant genotyping information when compared to serological phenotyping alone. FY*02N.01 (FY*B GATA-1) (n = 95; 90%) and RH variant alleles (n = 52, 49%; majority accompanied by FY*02N.01) were common, the latter with putative partial antigen expression in 25 patients. Variability in genotype-phenotype antigen prediction occurred mostly in the Rh system, notably with the e antigen (kappa: 0.17). Fifteen (14.2%) patients had a history of alloimmunisation, with five having HTR documented; no differences in clinical outcomes were found in patients with partial antigen expression. Genotype/extended-phenotype matching strategies may have prevented alloimmunisation events. CONCLUSION: We show a high frequency of variant alleles/polymorphisms in the SCD population, where genotyping may complement serological phenotyping. Genotyping SCD patients before transfusion may prevent alloimmunisation and HTRs, and knowledge of the FY*02N.01 variant allele increases feasibility of finding compatible blood.


Assuntos
Anemia Falciforme , Tipagem e Reações Cruzadas Sanguíneas , Sistema do Grupo Sanguíneo Duffy , Transfusão de Eritrócitos , Técnicas de Genotipagem , Receptores de Superfície Celular , Reação Transfusional , Adolescente , Adulto , Alelos , Anemia Falciforme/imunologia , Anemia Falciforme/terapia , Criança , Pré-Escolar , Sistema do Grupo Sanguíneo Duffy/genética , Sistema do Grupo Sanguíneo Duffy/imunologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Receptores de Superfície Celular/genética , Receptores de Superfície Celular/imunologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Reação Transfusional/genética , Reação Transfusional/imunologia , Reação Transfusional/prevenção & controle
2.
Transfusion ; 59(3): 972-980, 2019 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30549289

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Wrong blood in tube (WBIT) errors are a preventable cause of ABO-mismatched RBC transfusions. Electronic patient identification systems (e.g., scanning a patient's wristband barcode before pretransfusion sample collection) are thought to reduce WBIT errors, but the effectiveness of these systems is unclear. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Part 1: Using retrospective data, we compared pretransfusion sample WBIT rates at hospitals using manual patient identification (n = 16 sites; >1.6 million samples) with WBIT rates at hospitals using electronic patient identification for some or all sample collections (n = 4 sites; >0.5 million samples). Also, we compared WBIT rates after implementation of electronic patient identification with preimplementation WBIT rates. Causes and frequencies of WBIT errors were evaluated at each site. Part 2: Transfusion service laboratories (n = 18) prospectively typed mislabeled (rejected) samples (n = 2844) to determine WBIT rates among samples with minor labeling errors. RESULTS: Part 1: The overall unadjusted WBIT rate at sites using manual patient identification was 1:10,110 versus 1:35,806 for sites using electronic identification (p < 0.0001). Correcting for repeat samples and silent WBIT errors yielded overall adjusted WBIT rates of 1:3046 for sites using manual identification and 1:14,606 for sites using electronic identification (p < 0.0001), with wide variation among individual sites. Part 2: The unadjusted WBIT rate among mislabeled (rejected) samples was 1:71 (adjusted WBIT rate, 1:28). CONCLUSION: In this study, using electronic patient identification at the time of pretransfusion sample collection was associated with approximately fivefold fewer WBIT errors compared with using manual patient identification. WBIT rates were high among mislabeled (rejected) samples, confirming that rejecting samples with even minor labeling errors helps mitigate the risk of ABO-incompatible transfusions.


Assuntos
Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde/normas , Erros Médicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Bancos de Sangue/estatística & dados numéricos , Coleta de Amostras Sanguíneas/normas , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
Detalhe da pesquisa