Ensis01

So they don’t forget?!

For donors; molecular testing provides a full predicted phenotype which becomes their historical phenotype. To send out labelled antigen negative units they need to be serologically confirmed. If there is no anti sera it will be labelled to that effect I.e. “historically negative by molecular methods”. This will efficiently provide the supplier more combinations of antigen negative units. Though they will proberbly still screen for the Rh and only send out if good. Another very important and useful part of the information molecular testing provides is the antigen variant information for both donor and patient (several other threads on this!). Also If the volume sent out is high enough it may be less expensive and provide more information than the usual full serological phenotype.

For those that do elutions; do you use the cord blood or get a new specimen?

If Panel A has one cell with a 1+ reaction and all other cells are negative, I would call it positive. The iffy/suspicious screen cell that may or may not be an artifact becomes irrelevant. The patient would remain on full cross match forever due to the positive panel A cell. Trying to prove the reactions to be artifact at this stage may be very time consuming and still not resolve the issue. It seems more efficient to just do the full cross matches while the screen is being run.

Forever.

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I agree with Cliff and AMcCord. I suggest to first determine if your lab can afford the time, i.e. do you have enough techs to work-up warm autos that require allo adsorptions in addition to your current work load. If you can and do then look for the answers to your list.

Any comparable unit.

Agreed

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS  

I just answered this question. My Score PASS