All Activity

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

For acquired maternal IgG antibodies (which may also be transferred postnatally through breast milk), assessing the antibody specificity (AbS) in the newborn, as previously mentioned, appears to be a reasonable approach. In addition, the Direct Antiglobulin Test (DAT) remains key, and performing an elution is important (even if the DAT result is negative). In your case, the negative DAT suggests that either the anti-N antibody did not cross the placenta, possibly due to being a naturally occurring IgM, and/or the baby is N-negative.

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

Happy Birthday!🎂

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

Sclerotic bodies This question and answer was originally published on Lab Tests Guide. They have generously permitted us to repost here on our site. This site's admin may have slightly modified the questions and answers. Please consider visiting their site: https://www.labtestsguide.com/ Submitter Cliff Category General Lab Submitted 07/04/2025  

Happy birthday

PathLabTalk would like to wish all members celebrating their birthday today a happy birthday. KGOLDMAN (65)Judy (49)jayinsat (58)nisarg (43)mtemplet (43)Tinag (80)Jodyp (66)bluealpaka (59)mpmiola (47)SABarry (58)jorgebove (63)pmartinez (65)Kimberly --antule --Leslie Richard (59)65percentoxygen --

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

In that case, I would consider a genotype, as getting hold of M+ N-, S-s-U- fresh units is not going to be easy. That having been said, as you say yourself, anti-N is rarely clinically significant and, if it is not detectable in either the maternal circulation, or in the baby's circulation, I wouldn't worry too much about giving M+, N-, S-s-U- blood. BEAR IN MIND THOUGH, THIS WILL BE A CLINICAL DECISION, AND I AM NOT, AND NEVER HAVE BEEN, MEDICALLY QUALIFIED.

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score FAIL  

Yes - she is African-American - the anti-N is pretty well established in her case to be an alloantibody - she's had it for awhile. I recognize in this case, that an anti-N is more than likely non-significant, so I was less worried about any issues here. I guess my REAL question is how long do you keep providing antigen negative units, particularly when the baby's antibody screen is negative? The way our policy reads right now is vague - but has been interpreted as basically until 4 months of age, which seems long to me!

I just answered this question. My Score FAIL  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score FAIL  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

Happy Birthday!🎂

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

It is incredibly rare for anti-N to be an alloantibody, unless the individual is M+N-, and also S-s-U-. This is because the amino acids that characterise the N antigen on the Glycophorin A molecule (leucine, serine, threonine, threonine, glutamic acid) are identical to the amino acids that characterise the 'N' antigen on the Glycophorin B molecule. Is the lady of Black ethnicity by any chance? If not, to be N Negative AND 'N' Negative would be almost unique. This suggests to me that the anti-N reported to be in the maternal circulation by the other hospital may well have been an auto-antibody, and would almost certainly be sub-clinical in its significance. In such a case, I would not bother with performing genotyping of the baby's N type. However, as far as Rh, K, etc, I would certainly suggest that antigen negative blood is given to the baby, and I certainly WOULD perform foetal genotyping (see my answer to Cliff above).