Comparison of automated solid phase versus manual saline indirect antiglobulin test methodology for non‐ABO antibody titration: Implications for perinatal antibody monitoring
Background Accurate antibody titration is crucial in prenatal evaluations to identify patients who need clinical monitoring for hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) causing fetal anemia. This study compares the established gold standard method of manual tube saline indirect antiglobulin...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) Pa.), 2023-12, Vol.63 (12), p.2289-2296 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 2296 |
---|---|
container_issue | 12 |
container_start_page | 2289 |
container_title | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.) |
container_volume | 63 |
creator | Niu, Shuang Vetsch, Megan Beaudin, Lynnette Bodnar, Melanie Clarke, Gwen |
description | Background
Accurate antibody titration is crucial in prenatal evaluations to identify patients who need clinical monitoring for hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) causing fetal anemia. This study compares the established gold standard method of manual tube saline indirect antiglobulin testing (SIAT) with the newer automated solid phase (ASP) method of antibody titration and aims to establish the critical titer threshold for ASP that corresponds to the previously established SIAT critical threshold of ≥16 used in our laboratory.
Study Design and Methods
One hundred fifty‐seven prenatal and donor plasma samples with known antibodies were tested using both SIAT and ASP methodologies and results were compared.
Results
The study found that ASP titers were, on average, 1.33 dilutions higher than SIAT titers. The critical titer cutoff for ASP was determined to be ≥32, which is one tube higher than the SIAT cutoff of ≥16.
Discussion
The ASP method for antibody titration offers greater reproducibility and efficiency compared with manual SIAT titration. This study suggests that a titer cutoff of ≥32 is appropriate for most clinically significant antibodies using ASP. However, further research is needed to determine the comparability of ASP with SIAT in samples with multiple antibodies, anti‐M antibodies, and other less common antibodies. Validation of the ASP titer cutoff against HDFN clinical outcomes is required before implementing this test for routine use in perinatal antibody titration. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/trf.17571 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2886326370</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2886326370</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-e2a304d3b50805e4d1d68e2a3cba2fb783ae3adb2cf66d36b6d35b53858a687f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp10c9qFDEcB_AgFrutHnwBCXixh2nzZ2cm460uVguFgtTzkEwy25QkvzHJKHvrI_RRfCafxOxu24NgDgn58eGb_Pgh9JaSU1rWWY7jKW3rlr5AC1rztmJdV79EC0KWtKKUs0N0lNIdIYR1hL5Ch7ztGCWCLNDvFfhJRpsgYBixnDN4mY3GCZzVeLqVyeCfJqY5YS_DLB1O0tlgsA3aRjNkLEO2awdqLmWcTcrYm3wLGhysN3iEiAOEP_cP55-ud1aB3uBsc5TZQviIL_3k7LC7pB2fTLRB5vLUM_cQbIZSXr9GB6N0ybx5PI_R94vPN6uv1dX1l8vV-VU18KWglWGSk6Xmqi5t1mapqW7EtjgoyUbVCi4Nl1qxYWwazRtVtlrVXNRCNqId-TH6sM-dIvyYS1e9t2kwzslgYE49E6LhrOEtKfT9P_QO5hjK74rqBNtCXtTJXg0RUopm7KdovYybnpJ-O8a-jLHfjbHYd4-Js_JGP8unuRVwtge_rDOb_yf1N98u9pF_AZcJrMs</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2898286323</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of automated solid phase versus manual saline indirect antiglobulin test methodology for non‐ABO antibody titration: Implications for perinatal antibody monitoring</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><creator>Niu, Shuang ; Vetsch, Megan ; Beaudin, Lynnette ; Bodnar, Melanie ; Clarke, Gwen</creator><creatorcontrib>Niu, Shuang ; Vetsch, Megan ; Beaudin, Lynnette ; Bodnar, Melanie ; Clarke, Gwen</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Accurate antibody titration is crucial in prenatal evaluations to identify patients who need clinical monitoring for hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) causing fetal anemia. This study compares the established gold standard method of manual tube saline indirect antiglobulin testing (SIAT) with the newer automated solid phase (ASP) method of antibody titration and aims to establish the critical titer threshold for ASP that corresponds to the previously established SIAT critical threshold of ≥16 used in our laboratory.
Study Design and Methods
One hundred fifty‐seven prenatal and donor plasma samples with known antibodies were tested using both SIAT and ASP methodologies and results were compared.
Results
The study found that ASP titers were, on average, 1.33 dilutions higher than SIAT titers. The critical titer cutoff for ASP was determined to be ≥32, which is one tube higher than the SIAT cutoff of ≥16.
Discussion
The ASP method for antibody titration offers greater reproducibility and efficiency compared with manual SIAT titration. This study suggests that a titer cutoff of ≥32 is appropriate for most clinically significant antibodies using ASP. However, further research is needed to determine the comparability of ASP with SIAT in samples with multiple antibodies, anti‐M antibodies, and other less common antibodies. Validation of the ASP titer cutoff against HDFN clinical outcomes is required before implementing this test for routine use in perinatal antibody titration.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1132</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/trf.17571</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37921080</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>ABO system ; alloimmunization ; Anemia ; Antibodies ; automated solid phase ; Automation ; conventional tube testing ; Coombs Test ; Erythroblastosis, Fetal - diagnosis ; Female ; Fetuses ; Hemolytic disease ; hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) ; Humans ; Immunologic Tests ; Infant, Newborn ; Monitoring ; perinatal antibody titration ; Pregnancy ; Reproducibility of Results ; Solid phases ; Telemedicine ; Titration</subject><ispartof>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2023-12, Vol.63 (12), p.2289-2296</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AABB.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. Transfusion published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of AABB.</rights><rights>2023. This article is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-e2a304d3b50805e4d1d68e2a3cba2fb783ae3adb2cf66d36b6d35b53858a687f3</cites><orcidid>0009-0008-6066-1632 ; 0000-0001-7738-3378</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111%2Ftrf.17571$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111%2Ftrf.17571$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37921080$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Niu, Shuang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vetsch, Megan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beaudin, Lynnette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodnar, Melanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Gwen</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of automated solid phase versus manual saline indirect antiglobulin test methodology for non‐ABO antibody titration: Implications for perinatal antibody monitoring</title><title>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</title><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><description>Background
Accurate antibody titration is crucial in prenatal evaluations to identify patients who need clinical monitoring for hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) causing fetal anemia. This study compares the established gold standard method of manual tube saline indirect antiglobulin testing (SIAT) with the newer automated solid phase (ASP) method of antibody titration and aims to establish the critical titer threshold for ASP that corresponds to the previously established SIAT critical threshold of ≥16 used in our laboratory.
Study Design and Methods
One hundred fifty‐seven prenatal and donor plasma samples with known antibodies were tested using both SIAT and ASP methodologies and results were compared.
Results
The study found that ASP titers were, on average, 1.33 dilutions higher than SIAT titers. The critical titer cutoff for ASP was determined to be ≥32, which is one tube higher than the SIAT cutoff of ≥16.
Discussion
The ASP method for antibody titration offers greater reproducibility and efficiency compared with manual SIAT titration. This study suggests that a titer cutoff of ≥32 is appropriate for most clinically significant antibodies using ASP. However, further research is needed to determine the comparability of ASP with SIAT in samples with multiple antibodies, anti‐M antibodies, and other less common antibodies. Validation of the ASP titer cutoff against HDFN clinical outcomes is required before implementing this test for routine use in perinatal antibody titration.</description><subject>ABO system</subject><subject>alloimmunization</subject><subject>Anemia</subject><subject>Antibodies</subject><subject>automated solid phase</subject><subject>Automation</subject><subject>conventional tube testing</subject><subject>Coombs Test</subject><subject>Erythroblastosis, Fetal - diagnosis</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fetuses</subject><subject>Hemolytic disease</subject><subject>hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN)</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Immunologic Tests</subject><subject>Infant, Newborn</subject><subject>Monitoring</subject><subject>perinatal antibody titration</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Solid phases</subject><subject>Telemedicine</subject><subject>Titration</subject><issn>0041-1132</issn><issn>1537-2995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>24P</sourceid><sourceid>WIN</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp10c9qFDEcB_AgFrutHnwBCXixh2nzZ2cm460uVguFgtTzkEwy25QkvzHJKHvrI_RRfCafxOxu24NgDgn58eGb_Pgh9JaSU1rWWY7jKW3rlr5AC1rztmJdV79EC0KWtKKUs0N0lNIdIYR1hL5Ch7ztGCWCLNDvFfhJRpsgYBixnDN4mY3GCZzVeLqVyeCfJqY5YS_DLB1O0tlgsA3aRjNkLEO2awdqLmWcTcrYm3wLGhysN3iEiAOEP_cP55-ud1aB3uBsc5TZQviIL_3k7LC7pB2fTLRB5vLUM_cQbIZSXr9GB6N0ybx5PI_R94vPN6uv1dX1l8vV-VU18KWglWGSk6Xmqi5t1mapqW7EtjgoyUbVCi4Nl1qxYWwazRtVtlrVXNRCNqId-TH6sM-dIvyYS1e9t2kwzslgYE49E6LhrOEtKfT9P_QO5hjK74rqBNtCXtTJXg0RUopm7KdovYybnpJ-O8a-jLHfjbHYd4-Js_JGP8unuRVwtge_rDOb_yf1N98u9pF_AZcJrMs</recordid><startdate>202312</startdate><enddate>202312</enddate><creator>Niu, Shuang</creator><creator>Vetsch, Megan</creator><creator>Beaudin, Lynnette</creator><creator>Bodnar, Melanie</creator><creator>Clarke, Gwen</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>24P</scope><scope>WIN</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6066-1632</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7738-3378</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202312</creationdate><title>Comparison of automated solid phase versus manual saline indirect antiglobulin test methodology for non‐ABO antibody titration: Implications for perinatal antibody monitoring</title><author>Niu, Shuang ; Vetsch, Megan ; Beaudin, Lynnette ; Bodnar, Melanie ; Clarke, Gwen</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3481-e2a304d3b50805e4d1d68e2a3cba2fb783ae3adb2cf66d36b6d35b53858a687f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>ABO system</topic><topic>alloimmunization</topic><topic>Anemia</topic><topic>Antibodies</topic><topic>automated solid phase</topic><topic>Automation</topic><topic>conventional tube testing</topic><topic>Coombs Test</topic><topic>Erythroblastosis, Fetal - diagnosis</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fetuses</topic><topic>Hemolytic disease</topic><topic>hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN)</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Immunologic Tests</topic><topic>Infant, Newborn</topic><topic>Monitoring</topic><topic>perinatal antibody titration</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Solid phases</topic><topic>Telemedicine</topic><topic>Titration</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Niu, Shuang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vetsch, Megan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beaudin, Lynnette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bodnar, Melanie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Clarke, Gwen</creatorcontrib><collection>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</collection><collection>Wiley Online Library Free Content</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Niu, Shuang</au><au>Vetsch, Megan</au><au>Beaudin, Lynnette</au><au>Bodnar, Melanie</au><au>Clarke, Gwen</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of automated solid phase versus manual saline indirect antiglobulin test methodology for non‐ABO antibody titration: Implications for perinatal antibody monitoring</atitle><jtitle>Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.)</jtitle><addtitle>Transfusion</addtitle><date>2023-12</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>63</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>2289</spage><epage>2296</epage><pages>2289-2296</pages><issn>0041-1132</issn><eissn>1537-2995</eissn><abstract>Background
Accurate antibody titration is crucial in prenatal evaluations to identify patients who need clinical monitoring for hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) causing fetal anemia. This study compares the established gold standard method of manual tube saline indirect antiglobulin testing (SIAT) with the newer automated solid phase (ASP) method of antibody titration and aims to establish the critical titer threshold for ASP that corresponds to the previously established SIAT critical threshold of ≥16 used in our laboratory.
Study Design and Methods
One hundred fifty‐seven prenatal and donor plasma samples with known antibodies were tested using both SIAT and ASP methodologies and results were compared.
Results
The study found that ASP titers were, on average, 1.33 dilutions higher than SIAT titers. The critical titer cutoff for ASP was determined to be ≥32, which is one tube higher than the SIAT cutoff of ≥16.
Discussion
The ASP method for antibody titration offers greater reproducibility and efficiency compared with manual SIAT titration. This study suggests that a titer cutoff of ≥32 is appropriate for most clinically significant antibodies using ASP. However, further research is needed to determine the comparability of ASP with SIAT in samples with multiple antibodies, anti‐M antibodies, and other less common antibodies. Validation of the ASP titer cutoff against HDFN clinical outcomes is required before implementing this test for routine use in perinatal antibody titration.</abstract><cop>Hoboken, USA</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>37921080</pmid><doi>10.1111/trf.17571</doi><tpages>8</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6066-1632</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7738-3378</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0041-1132 |
ispartof | Transfusion (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2023-12, Vol.63 (12), p.2289-2296 |
issn | 0041-1132 1537-2995 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2886326370 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via Wiley Online Library |
subjects | ABO system alloimmunization Anemia Antibodies automated solid phase Automation conventional tube testing Coombs Test Erythroblastosis, Fetal - diagnosis Female Fetuses Hemolytic disease hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) Humans Immunologic Tests Infant, Newborn Monitoring perinatal antibody titration Pregnancy Reproducibility of Results Solid phases Telemedicine Titration |
title | Comparison of automated solid phase versus manual saline indirect antiglobulin test methodology for non‐ABO antibody titration: Implications for perinatal antibody monitoring |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T12%3A32%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20automated%20solid%20phase%20versus%20manual%20saline%20indirect%20antiglobulin%20test%20methodology%20for%20non%E2%80%90ABO%20antibody%20titration:%20Implications%20for%20perinatal%20antibody%20monitoring&rft.jtitle=Transfusion%20(Philadelphia,%20Pa.)&rft.au=Niu,%20Shuang&rft.date=2023-12&rft.volume=63&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=2289&rft.epage=2296&rft.pages=2289-2296&rft.issn=0041-1132&rft.eissn=1537-2995&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/trf.17571&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2886326370%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2898286323&rft_id=info:pmid/37921080&rfr_iscdi=true |