Evaluation of the flow cytometric crossmatch : Preliminary results of a multicenter study
The flow cytometric crossmatch is a technique that is increasingly being used by clinical transplant laboratories. In this multicenter study by the British Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics Flow Cytometry Group, a series of crossmatches were carried out to determine whether different...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Transplantation 1996-04, Vol.61 (7), p.1108-1111 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1111 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 7 |
| container_start_page | 1108 |
| container_title | Transplantation |
| container_volume | 61 |
| creator | HARMER, A. W GARNER, S REYNOLDS, W. M ROBSON, A SUTTON, M VAN DAM, M. G SHENTON, B. K BELL, A. E ANYANWU, C CAVANAGH, G CULKIN, J EVANS, P. R HORSBURGH, T MARTIN, S MCCLOSKEY, D |
| description | The flow cytometric crossmatch is a technique that is increasingly being used by clinical transplant laboratories. In this multicenter study by the British Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics Flow Cytometry Group, a series of crossmatches were carried out to determine whether different centers obtained same results when performing the same crossmatch. There was greater than 80% agreement among participating laboratories on the results of 35/54 tests. There was no clear agreement in the remaining 20 cases. Quantitative analysis, estimating the number of cell-bound fluorescein molecules, demonstrated that differences in the criteria used by each center to define a positive crossmatch were responsible for some discordant results. When applied, definition of positivity based on the molecules of fluorescein increased concordance from 57.5% to 81.4%.l. These results suggest that a criterion for the interpretation of results based on quantitative analysis of bound antibody may be more reliable than methods in current routine use. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1097/00007890-199604150-00021 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78018460</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>78018460</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-e3657c192137b3c29385a35fabcc7d7540b69261242e78fa3c413496fe2a20f23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kEtLAzEUhYMotVZ_gpCFuBvNa_JwJ1IfUNCFLlyFTJrQkXnUJKP035u2Y7NJyDnnXs4HAMToBiMlblE-QipUYKU4YrhERf4h-AhMcUlZwZFEx2CKslRgSsUpOIvxK1tKKsQETCQnFCs2BZ_zH9MMJtV9B3sP08pB3_S_0G5S37oUagtt6GNsTbIreAffgmvqtu5M2MDg4tCkuM0Z2OZnbV2XXIAxDcvNOTjxponuYrxn4ONx_v7wXCxen14e7heFJZKlwlFeCosVwVRU1BJFZWlo6U1lrViKkqGKK8IxYcQJ6Q21DFOmuHfEEOQJnYHr_dx16L8HF5Nu62hd05jO9UPUQiIsGUfZKPfGXaHgvF6Hus1FNEZ6S1X_U9UHqnpHNUcvxx1D1brlIThizPrVqJtoTeOD6WwdDzaKuGQloX-A-38o</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78018460</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluation of the flow cytometric crossmatch : Preliminary results of a multicenter study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>HARMER, A. W ; GARNER, S ; REYNOLDS, W. M ; ROBSON, A ; SUTTON, M ; VAN DAM, M. G ; SHENTON, B. K ; BELL, A. E ; ANYANWU, C ; CAVANAGH, G ; CULKIN, J ; EVANS, P. R ; HORSBURGH, T ; MARTIN, S ; MCCLOSKEY, D</creator><creatorcontrib>HARMER, A. W ; GARNER, S ; REYNOLDS, W. M ; ROBSON, A ; SUTTON, M ; VAN DAM, M. G ; SHENTON, B. K ; BELL, A. E ; ANYANWU, C ; CAVANAGH, G ; CULKIN, J ; EVANS, P. R ; HORSBURGH, T ; MARTIN, S ; MCCLOSKEY, D</creatorcontrib><description>The flow cytometric crossmatch is a technique that is increasingly being used by clinical transplant laboratories. In this multicenter study by the British Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics Flow Cytometry Group, a series of crossmatches were carried out to determine whether different centers obtained same results when performing the same crossmatch. There was greater than 80% agreement among participating laboratories on the results of 35/54 tests. There was no clear agreement in the remaining 20 cases. Quantitative analysis, estimating the number of cell-bound fluorescein molecules, demonstrated that differences in the criteria used by each center to define a positive crossmatch were responsible for some discordant results. When applied, definition of positivity based on the molecules of fluorescein increased concordance from 57.5% to 81.4%.l. These results suggest that a criterion for the interpretation of results based on quantitative analysis of bound antibody may be more reliable than methods in current routine use.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0041-1337</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1534-6080</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00007890-199604150-00021</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8623194</identifier><identifier>CODEN: TRPLAU</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hagerstown, MD: Lippincott</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Flow Cytometry ; Histocompatibility Testing ; Humans ; Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) ; Medical sciences ; Miscellaneous. Technology ; Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques</subject><ispartof>Transplantation, 1996-04, Vol.61 (7), p.1108-1111</ispartof><rights>1996 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-e3657c192137b3c29385a35fabcc7d7540b69261242e78fa3c413496fe2a20f23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3068452$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8623194$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>HARMER, A. W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GARNER, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>REYNOLDS, W. M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ROBSON, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SUTTON, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VAN DAM, M. G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHENTON, B. K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BELL, A. E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ANYANWU, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CAVANAGH, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CULKIN, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EVANS, P. R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HORSBURGH, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MARTIN, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCCLOSKEY, D</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluation of the flow cytometric crossmatch : Preliminary results of a multicenter study</title><title>Transplantation</title><addtitle>Transplantation</addtitle><description>The flow cytometric crossmatch is a technique that is increasingly being used by clinical transplant laboratories. In this multicenter study by the British Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics Flow Cytometry Group, a series of crossmatches were carried out to determine whether different centers obtained same results when performing the same crossmatch. There was greater than 80% agreement among participating laboratories on the results of 35/54 tests. There was no clear agreement in the remaining 20 cases. Quantitative analysis, estimating the number of cell-bound fluorescein molecules, demonstrated that differences in the criteria used by each center to define a positive crossmatch were responsible for some discordant results. When applied, definition of positivity based on the molecules of fluorescein increased concordance from 57.5% to 81.4%.l. These results suggest that a criterion for the interpretation of results based on quantitative analysis of bound antibody may be more reliable than methods in current routine use.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Flow Cytometry</subject><subject>Histocompatibility Testing</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Miscellaneous. Technology</subject><subject>Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques</subject><issn>0041-1337</issn><issn>1534-6080</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kEtLAzEUhYMotVZ_gpCFuBvNa_JwJ1IfUNCFLlyFTJrQkXnUJKP035u2Y7NJyDnnXs4HAMToBiMlblE-QipUYKU4YrhERf4h-AhMcUlZwZFEx2CKslRgSsUpOIvxK1tKKsQETCQnFCs2BZ_zH9MMJtV9B3sP08pB3_S_0G5S37oUagtt6GNsTbIreAffgmvqtu5M2MDg4tCkuM0Z2OZnbV2XXIAxDcvNOTjxponuYrxn4ONx_v7wXCxen14e7heFJZKlwlFeCosVwVRU1BJFZWlo6U1lrViKkqGKK8IxYcQJ6Q21DFOmuHfEEOQJnYHr_dx16L8HF5Nu62hd05jO9UPUQiIsGUfZKPfGXaHgvF6Hus1FNEZ6S1X_U9UHqnpHNUcvxx1D1brlIThizPrVqJtoTeOD6WwdDzaKuGQloX-A-38o</recordid><startdate>19960415</startdate><enddate>19960415</enddate><creator>HARMER, A. W</creator><creator>GARNER, S</creator><creator>REYNOLDS, W. M</creator><creator>ROBSON, A</creator><creator>SUTTON, M</creator><creator>VAN DAM, M. G</creator><creator>SHENTON, B. K</creator><creator>BELL, A. E</creator><creator>ANYANWU, C</creator><creator>CAVANAGH, G</creator><creator>CULKIN, J</creator><creator>EVANS, P. R</creator><creator>HORSBURGH, T</creator><creator>MARTIN, S</creator><creator>MCCLOSKEY, D</creator><general>Lippincott</general><scope>IQODW</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>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19960415</creationdate><title>Evaluation of the flow cytometric crossmatch : Preliminary results of a multicenter study</title><author>HARMER, A. W ; GARNER, S ; REYNOLDS, W. M ; ROBSON, A ; SUTTON, M ; VAN DAM, M. G ; SHENTON, B. K ; BELL, A. E ; ANYANWU, C ; CAVANAGH, G ; CULKIN, J ; EVANS, P. R ; HORSBURGH, T ; MARTIN, S ; MCCLOSKEY, D</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-e3657c192137b3c29385a35fabcc7d7540b69261242e78fa3c413496fe2a20f23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Flow Cytometry</topic><topic>Histocompatibility Testing</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects)</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Miscellaneous. Technology</topic><topic>Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>HARMER, A. W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GARNER, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>REYNOLDS, W. M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ROBSON, A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SUTTON, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VAN DAM, M. G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SHENTON, B. K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BELL, A. E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>ANYANWU, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CAVANAGH, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CULKIN, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EVANS, P. R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HORSBURGH, T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MARTIN, S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCCLOSKEY, D</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Transplantation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>HARMER, A. W</au><au>GARNER, S</au><au>REYNOLDS, W. M</au><au>ROBSON, A</au><au>SUTTON, M</au><au>VAN DAM, M. G</au><au>SHENTON, B. K</au><au>BELL, A. E</au><au>ANYANWU, C</au><au>CAVANAGH, G</au><au>CULKIN, J</au><au>EVANS, P. R</au><au>HORSBURGH, T</au><au>MARTIN, S</au><au>MCCLOSKEY, D</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluation of the flow cytometric crossmatch : Preliminary results of a multicenter study</atitle><jtitle>Transplantation</jtitle><addtitle>Transplantation</addtitle><date>1996-04-15</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>61</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1108</spage><epage>1111</epage><pages>1108-1111</pages><issn>0041-1337</issn><eissn>1534-6080</eissn><coden>TRPLAU</coden><abstract>The flow cytometric crossmatch is a technique that is increasingly being used by clinical transplant laboratories. In this multicenter study by the British Society for Histocompatibility and Immunogenetics Flow Cytometry Group, a series of crossmatches were carried out to determine whether different centers obtained same results when performing the same crossmatch. There was greater than 80% agreement among participating laboratories on the results of 35/54 tests. There was no clear agreement in the remaining 20 cases. Quantitative analysis, estimating the number of cell-bound fluorescein molecules, demonstrated that differences in the criteria used by each center to define a positive crossmatch were responsible for some discordant results. When applied, definition of positivity based on the molecules of fluorescein increased concordance from 57.5% to 81.4%.l. These results suggest that a criterion for the interpretation of results based on quantitative analysis of bound antibody may be more reliable than methods in current routine use.</abstract><cop>Hagerstown, MD</cop><pub>Lippincott</pub><pmid>8623194</pmid><doi>10.1097/00007890-199604150-00021</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0041-1337 |
| ispartof | Transplantation, 1996-04, Vol.61 (7), p.1108-1111 |
| issn | 0041-1337 1534-6080 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78018460 |
| source | MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete |
| subjects | Biological and medical sciences Flow Cytometry Histocompatibility Testing Humans Investigative techniques, diagnostic techniques (general aspects) Medical sciences Miscellaneous. Technology Pathology. Cytology. Biochemistry. Spectrometry. Miscellaneous investigative techniques |
| title | Evaluation of the flow cytometric crossmatch : Preliminary results of a multicenter study |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-07T17%3A40%3A59IST&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=Evaluation%20of%20the%20flow%20cytometric%20crossmatch%20:%20Preliminary%20results%20of%20a%20multicenter%20study&rft.jtitle=Transplantation&rft.au=HARMER,%20A.%20W&rft.date=1996-04-15&rft.volume=61&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1108&rft.epage=1111&rft.pages=1108-1111&rft.issn=0041-1337&rft.eissn=1534-6080&rft.coden=TRPLAU&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00007890-199604150-00021&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78018460%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=78018460&rft_id=info:pmid/8623194&rfr_iscdi=true |