Jump to content
May 2024 Challenge

geekay

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    66

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Country

    Saudi Arabia

 Content Type 

Everything posted by geekay

  1. geekay
    Hi there, The chances of an "acquired antigen" due to some intestinal problems like malignancy or sepsis, are theretically right. But I understand that the artificial antigens will not be picked up by the newer generation antisera which are monoclonal. The earlier versions of antisera, which were polyclonal, used to give "positivity" for both natural and "artificial antigens". But in this present, where majority use monoclonal antisera, such problems and complications are extremely rare. The present problem of "A or O " could have been sorted by the Blood Bank by comparing the grouping results using a "parallel run" with monoclonal and polyclonal antisera. ..... In addition, where there is a discrepancy like this, any sensible Blood bank would like to go by the rule "PLAY SAFELY"...and use "O group " Blood for transfusion if necessity comes. best wishes...
  2. geekay
    Hi everybody ! I am Dr Geekay from Chennai, India, and had been working in Transfusion services / Blood Banking since 1988. Hi to everybody... best wishes to all...
  3. geekay
    Hi there, It ultimately depends upon the volume of red cells we transfuse ! and also, fluctuations are common in the values like Haemoglobin% , Blood sugar and Blood pressure, depending upon the technique we use for evaluation. So, considering all these, I think, this "jump by 2%" is acceptable ! Maybe more inputs from the other senior players in this team would be interesting... best wishes...
  4. geekay
    Hi there, It is better to have a system wherein " a double check system" is implemeted for all the data related to collection till issue. It can be done by a colleague who could be a junior or a senior technical person. In the ward also, the data need to be checked twice either by a seniot nursing staff or a doctor. Likewise, the data enetered into the system from the registartion time, need to be supervised on a daily basis by a senior person,preferably technically competent.
  5. geekay
    Thanks Mr Mabel for the valuable info.
  6. geekay
    Hi there, Our cardiac team was very happy with the 2 temperatures like 4 C and 20 C. For 20-22 C we used to make use of platelet incubators for incubation ! best wishes...
  7. geekay
    Hi there, In the cardiac centre where I used to be associated with, we were doing the screening for cold agglutinins at 4 C only...later on, the cardiac aneasthetics started insisting on , for 20 C also. Since then we were doing the testing for 4 C and 20 C. best wishes....
  8. geekay
    Hi there ! Connection between "sickle cell trait" and "WBC filtration" ? any reference given somewhere ? we dont defer the donors for this reson ! with wishes !
  9. geekay
    Hi there ! I fully agree with that Blood bank supervisor who has said so... I really wonder why people go for "escapism" and try to avoid the "Du test" (negative confirmation test) for the donors. But same applies for the Blood bank set up where we are supposed to give a firm report to the patient before or after transfusion. Why I said "supposed to" is , not all hoapitals in all places do give reports to the patients when they get blood transfusion in their centres. After all it is a matter of 50 minutes, if at all, we do by meanual technique...right ? Why dont all of us play it safe...safer and safest ? afterall, thats BLOOD BANKING is all about....right ? best wishes to everybody...
  10. geekay
    How do you rule out, with confidence. that a case of hepatitis admitted, and who had received Blood Transfusion in the recent past, is not a case of post Transfusion Hepatitis ? Other than "look back programme" wherein the Donors could be called back and re-tested etc etc.. anybody can help please ? Inputs would be appreciated ! Thanks in advance.... !!
  11. geekay
    Some Books do advise 3 months as the ideal gap between 2 healthy donations while some others give it as 2 months. Inputs please ! The problem comes when the same donor has donated in different places ! I had a donor like that today...
  12. geekay
    Please tell me where I can find the latest accepted protocol for the Donor screening of TTD s ? This refers to Blood centers without the facility for NAT.. Previously, for HIV testing, WHO had brought out an international protocol... likewise...for all TTD s ? pls help me ! thanks.... engeekay2003
  13. geekay
    Hi there ! Is it a real solution to the problem or an escapism ? You are solving the problem by giving Rhogam...agreed ... But are you going to call the patient / donor "positive" , "negative" or "weak D positive" ? In this modern era of increasing awareness, if a literate patient or a donor asks for a report ? Different hospitals/institutions following different protocols in matters like this, will lead to confusion only ?
  14. geekay
    Blood banking is an art of "playing safe"..thats what they say...! Two things are entirely different ! One : To give Rhogam or not : If the "Rh Positivity" could not be detected within 72 hours, then proceed as if it is "Rh Positive" and give Rhogam ! So no damage done ! Two : Regarding "transfusion requiremnt" : if required as an SOS, go ahead and give Rh Negative Blood . Whats so confusing here ? Three : Regarding reporting : For newborn, sometimes when there is a borderline situation of calling it as Rh negative or Rh Positive, a repeat sample after 3 months is suggested as protocol in some of the accepted Books.
  15. geekay
    Hi, Not only that the "gel technique" is expensive, but many incidents have taught me that the "gel technique" gives false positives frequently. Maybe more inputs from the other readers would be appreciated in this context. I have found in so many situations that, false aggregations and rouleaux formations do give "positivity" in gel technique. More inputs please ! After all they say, when there is confusion, go by the old gold manual technique. !
  16. geekay
    Hi there ! As far as the procedure you have adopted, it is theoretically right.. No confusions required here. Regarding the terminology, "Du test /Du antigen " have been replaced with the word "weak - D antigen." since the past 10 years or so. Simple practicality of the situation is , if the "weak D test " could not be reported within the time limit of 72 hours, go ahead with giving Rhogam , assuming that it is Rh POSITIVE. After all, there is no damage done ..right ?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.