trifuged and plasma samples were cross-matched against two samples of DEA 7-positive and three DEA 7-negative RBCs using the GEL technique. Samples that showed >1+ agglutination strength with DEA 7–positive RBCs samples but not with DEA 7–negative RBCs samples were classified as containing naturally occurring anti–DEA 7 antibodies. Samples that showed no agglutination with DEA 7-positive RBCs were classified as containing no anti-DEA 7 antibodies. Thirdly, the 40 DEA 7-negative plasma samples were cross-matched in double blind fashion with the two DEA-7 positive RBCs samples using TUBE and immunochromatographic kit and results were compared with those of the agglutination on GEL, considered the gold standard technique. A positive/incompatible cross match was identified when agglutination, hemolysis, or both reactions were present with TUBE technique or when a red band, other than the control one, was identified on the immunochromatographic strip. To determine relationship between results obtained with various methods, 2 x 2 tables were used. Cohen’s kappa coefficient (K) was calculated with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) between results of GEL and other methods. With GEL agglutination 21/40 plasma samples showed positive cross-matching and 19/40 showed negative cross- matching. The same results were obtained by TUBE cross match, whilst only 1/40 sample showed positive cross matching with immunochromatography. There was a statistically significant relationship between results of GEL and TUBE methods (P<0.000), but not between GEL and immunochromatography results (P=1,000). Agreement quantified by kappa showed perfect (K=1,000, 95% CI 1,000 to 1,000) agreement for comparison of TUBE to GEL, but agreement equivalent to chance (K=0,0453; 95% CI -0.0427 to 0.133) was seen between GEL and immunochromatography. GEL column and TUBE crossmatch tests are useful methods to evaluate DEA 7 blood compatibility, whereas the immunochromatography was not able to identify DEA 7 incompatibilities due to anti-DEA 7 naturally occurring antibodies.
Comparison of three methods of cross-matching to detect canine DEA 7 blood incompatibility / E. Spada, R. Perego, V.F. L. M., D.R.P.C. M., L. Baggiani, P. Dall'Ara, D. Proverbio. ((Intervento presentato al convegno 60th AAVLD/121st USAHA Annual Meeting tenutosi a San Diego nel 2017.
Comparison of three methods of cross-matching to detect canine DEA 7 blood incompatibility
E. Spada
;R. Perego;L. Baggiani;P. Dall'Ara;D. Proverbio
2017
Abstract
trifuged and plasma samples were cross-matched against two samples of DEA 7-positive and three DEA 7-negative RBCs using the GEL technique. Samples that showed >1+ agglutination strength with DEA 7–positive RBCs samples but not with DEA 7–negative RBCs samples were classified as containing naturally occurring anti–DEA 7 antibodies. Samples that showed no agglutination with DEA 7-positive RBCs were classified as containing no anti-DEA 7 antibodies. Thirdly, the 40 DEA 7-negative plasma samples were cross-matched in double blind fashion with the two DEA-7 positive RBCs samples using TUBE and immunochromatographic kit and results were compared with those of the agglutination on GEL, considered the gold standard technique. A positive/incompatible cross match was identified when agglutination, hemolysis, or both reactions were present with TUBE technique or when a red band, other than the control one, was identified on the immunochromatographic strip. To determine relationship between results obtained with various methods, 2 x 2 tables were used. Cohen’s kappa coefficient (K) was calculated with 95% confidence interval (95%CI) between results of GEL and other methods. With GEL agglutination 21/40 plasma samples showed positive cross-matching and 19/40 showed negative cross- matching. The same results were obtained by TUBE cross match, whilst only 1/40 sample showed positive cross matching with immunochromatography. There was a statistically significant relationship between results of GEL and TUBE methods (P<0.000), but not between GEL and immunochromatography results (P=1,000). Agreement quantified by kappa showed perfect (K=1,000, 95% CI 1,000 to 1,000) agreement for comparison of TUBE to GEL, but agreement equivalent to chance (K=0,0453; 95% CI -0.0427 to 0.133) was seen between GEL and immunochromatography. GEL column and TUBE crossmatch tests are useful methods to evaluate DEA 7 blood compatibility, whereas the immunochromatography was not able to identify DEA 7 incompatibilities due to anti-DEA 7 naturally occurring antibodies.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
Poster XM AB DEA7 AAVLD 2017.pdf
accesso riservato
Tipologia:
Altro
Dimensione
4.16 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
4.16 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.