The gel test: sensitivity and specificity for unexpected antibodies to blood group antigens

Publications

Share / Export Citation / Email / Print / Text size:

Immunohematology

American National Red Cross

Subject: Medical Laboratory Technology

GET ALERTS SUBSCRIBE

ISSN: 0894-203X
eISSN: 1930-3955

DESCRIPTION

3
Reader(s)
8
Visit(s)
0
Comment(s)
0
Share(s)

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue / page

Archive
Volume 37 (2021)
Volume 36 (2020)
Volume 35 (2019)
Volume 34 (2018)
Volume 33 (2017)
Volume 32 (2016)
Volume 31 (2015)
Volume 30 (2014)
Volume 29 (2013)
Volume 28 (2012)
Volume 27 (2011)
Volume 26 (2010)
Volume 25 (2009)
Volume 24 (2008)
Volume 23 (2007)
Volume 22 (2006)
Volume 21 (2005)
Volume 20 (2004)
Volume 19 (2003)
Volume 18 (2002)
Volume 17 (2001)
Volume 16 (2000)
Volume 15 (1999)
Volume 14 (1998)
Volume 13 (1997)
Volume 12 (1996)
Volume 11 (1995)
Volume 10 (1994)
Volume 9 (1993)
Volume 8 (1992)
Volume 7 (1991)
Volume 6 (1990)
Volume 5 (1989)
Volume 4 (1988)
Volume 3 (1987)
Related articles

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 4 (December 1997) > List of articles

The gel test: sensitivity and specificity for unexpected antibodies to blood group antigens

W. John Judd / E. Ann Steiner / Pamela C. Knaf

Keywords : gel test, antibody detection, LISS, pretransfusion testing, method validation

Citation Information : Immunohematology. Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages 132-135, DOI: https://doi.org/10.21307/immunohematology-2019-728

License : (Transfer of Copyright)

Published Online: 09-November-2020

ARTICLE

ABSTRACT

The recently FDA-licensed anti-IgG gel test for pretransfusion antibody detection requires crossover validation before implementation. Six hundred coded samples sent for routine pretransfusion tests were used to compare GEL (ID-MTS, Ortho Diagnostic Systems Inc., Raritan, NJ) with Löw and Messeter’s low-ionic-strength saline (LISS). There were 456 GEL–LISS–, 97 GEL+LISS+, 45 GEL–LISS+, and 2 GEL+LISS– tests. The 144 positive tests involved 157 antibodies; 67 of these (cold auto, anti-M, -Le, etc.) were considered harmless with respect to transfusion management. GEL–LISS+ tests included seven samples containing potentially significant antibodies (assumed from specificity): anti-K(4), -Jka, -Fyb, and -S. Two potentially significant antibodies (antiC and -D) were GEL+LISS–. Sensitivity and specificity for potentially significant antibodies were 92% and 96% for GEL, and 98% and 90% for LISS, respectively. The seven GEL–LISS+ samples associated with potentially significant antibodies were from six patients. Five of these antibodies, all detected in immune-suppressed patients, reacted predominantly as agglutinins in LISS. None of these seven antibodies were detected reliably by polyethylene glycol and LISS-additive tube methods. In light of the immune status of the patients with GEL–LISS+ agglutinins with specificity normally considered potentially significant, and because other valid methods did not detect these antibodies, their clinical importance is questionable. Excluding these questionable antibodies, GEL has the same sensitivity and better specificity than LISS. GEL is a valid method for pretransfusion antibody detection.

You don't have 'Full Text' access of this article.

Purchase Article Subscribe Journal Share