Leaderboard

It snowed outside my window Saturday. I prefer the snow in this window actually.

And Happy New Year! If you are off on New Year's Eve....please celebrate, but responsibly so that you are not one of those dreaded MTPs!!!

Since it's the same vendor I don't think you need a validation. When I changed from Immucor to BioRad for our tube panels I did performance validation covering avidity (strength of reaction), accuracy and precision (predictability). The FDA liked it and that's my plan now that I'm changing over to BioRad's gel reagents as well.

And Happy Boxing Day! Scott

Woo hoo! Snow and Xmas lights! They are so cool! Ooops! I just broke one... darn! broke another.. Ooops... Scott

OK, should be working now. Definitely in the Default theme, may work in others too.

Ya, Malcolm. I can think of a few other situations where this may not be the best policy. When requested by physicians, we have done eluates on compliment-only positive DATs where we ID antibodies, showing that one can have a "false IgG negative" DAT in certain situations. Anyway, in most cases we would repeat the eluate if, in the first place, we identified that an allo-Ab was present on the patient's cells. But as for initially negative eluates, if a repeat DAT is still positive but not stronger than the previous, we would not bother with another eluate. The idea being that if the patient is producing a significant amount of antibody, the DAT reaction would be stronger. Scott