Leaderboard

the same as you would for any other antibody But you need to make sure that if there is an anti-Lea or -Leb present that it is reacting strictly at 37°C. Otherwise no clinical relevance at all

NO! Under no circumstances, even if the DAT was negative with anti-C3d (as it usually is in cases of PCH). The titre (Tabbie, you are in the UK, so spell it the correct UK way! ) is of no relevance whatsoever, and knowing it would make no difference to the way the patient is treated.

Which one will you report in the EMR? A good response to your interviewer would be that you would consult the policy.

If the genotype was done with full sequencing and the phenotype was tested with various clones and all of that said negative, how did the paper come to the conclusion that this was an auto anti-C rather than an allo-anti-C?

And I forgot to say - no, this is not the pattern of an anti-I

Presuming you are in a normal lab, you should 1. Find out about transfusion history as a matter of considerable urgency, including plasma products 2. do your normal exclusions (I would be a bit worried about an anti-Jkb with something else 3. Use additional cells 4. Put up a saline RT panel 5. Fully phenotype your patient 6. Do a DAT - look very hard for a mixed field Then review!

That's why Chemists won't come near Blood Bank -scares the pants off of them.

I appreciate in a perfect world the error rate would be zero; however, this is not feasible as humans are entering data and humans will make mistakes. I am not looking for someone to tell me my error rate is OK because it compares to someone else - I am looking for some benchmarks. For example, if I am at an error rate of 6% and folks in similar sized facilities accessioning similar numbers are around 3% then I know I need to seriously look into our processes and can work towards that goal. If I happen to be around the same error rate as other comparable sites then I will not expect to see as large a decrease in the error rate but will continue to ensure it trends downward. thanks for the discussion...