Leaderboard

In this paper from 1985, "The Lui elution technique A simple and efficient method for eluting ABO antibodies c. s. FENG, K. c. KIRKLEY, c. A. EICHER, AND D. s. DE JONGH, TRANSFUSION 1985; 25:433-434.", the authors thank A. Lui. MT(ASCP)SBB, who introduced this technique to them. Therefore, I believe Lui is the name of the MT who invented this elution method.

That has always been my impression as well. On a related topic, the u in Du stands for Underwood. The first patient who was discovered (or at least the first one written up) was named Underwood. Frances Wideman told me that at a CAP Transfusion Medicine Seminar ages ago.

I think Anita Lui was a blood banker in New Orleans. I was there 1977-78 when I first heard of the Lui elution. I believe it was first published in the South Central Association of Blood Banks' Journal.

We do a screen and, if indicated, A and B cells. sandra

If you're looking for a procedure see attached. BBI0023 Exchange Transfusion 031522.docx

We have SafeTrace instead of Soft, but we have made reconstituted whole blood for many years. We normally use it to prime a circuit. We treat the reconstituted units as if it were two units in one bag. We sign both units out in the computer even though they are in one bag. SafeTrace does not allow pooling of products which are of different product types. If Soft will allow that, you may be able to use that to avoid dealing with two unit numbers, etc.

Sad news. I never met him. I was fortunate enough to have known John Case, John Judd, and George Garratty.

Welcome

thank you

I specifically remember doing the Lui freeze -thaw on DAT + ABO incompatible cords samples in 81' at the Blood Bank in Bethesda MD so possibly the name and method predated the article.

We started using the computer crossmatch in the old Hemocare system in 1997. Back then you had to apply for a variance from FDA. FDA made me jump through hoops before they would grant the variance. They did not publish the guidance until 6 months after we applied. Had to prove the system would not you set up and issue an incompatible product, i.e., issue an A to an O or AB, etc.; that you could not perform an EC on someone with an antibody; that there were two ABO/Rhs on file. We had to send them the evidence that we crossmatched every ABO group against every ABO group to prove the above. The next year I guess they decided that we were not killing people and so you did not have to apply for a variance anymore, but, had to have your validation available. Have to redo the validation with every software upgrade.

Welcome!

Welcome mollymotos.

We use the screening cells. They've never been positive.

Years ago, we kept the segment used for the crossmatch in a covered tube rubber banded to the patient’s specimen. When we went to the electronic issue, we switched to pulling an extra segment when we received units. It was bulky keeping the segs with the patient specimens. Plus, we did a lot of add on crossmatches and had to keep all the specimens organized and spaced in case we needed to rubber band more segments to the tube. It was about 600 beds with a busy OR. In the decades we kept the crossmatched segments, we never found one time where a crossmatched segment did not match a segment from a unit involved in a transfusion reaction. When we started pulling and keeping an extra segment on receipt, I thought we might miss keeping some segments, but we never had a problem finding a seg for a work-up. Our specimen refrigerator looked a lot neater and specimens took up less room. You could check your reaction work-ups to see if there has ever been an error found when doing the reaction work-up. If not, you could demonstrate the extra time and supplies involved in keeping the crossmatched segments was not justified. .

I might be dating myself - years ago I worked for a transfusion service that manufactured packed red cells. CAP had required proficiency testing for the manufacturing process - if I remember, it was measuring the hematocrit. Just looked on the test menu and it seems that is no longer 'a thing'. So use the word 'competency' instead. Our trauma program uses a lot of blood and liquid plasma before we know the patient's blood type - I don't think I would choose Group O liquid plasma even though it is low-titer. As I write this, I realize that I'm looking at the problem with a distinct bias against more work for my team so please forgive. When we implemented whole blood, I was definitely averse to splitting the product to create components because of the work - both physical and intellectual - and I am still thinking that way. If it is feasible for you and you embrace the process, go forth!

Thank you very much.