Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'anti-d'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • General Info
    • Question of the Day
    • Introductions
    • Job Postings
    • Off Topic
    • Site Comments / Suggestions
  • BloodBankTalk (USA)
    • Transfusion Services
    • Patient Questions
    • Accrediting Agencies
    • Billing
    • Case Studies
    • Computer Systems / Software / ISBT128
    • Donor Services and Donor Recruitment
    • Education / Quality
    • Equipment
    • Immunohematology Reference Laboratories
    • Tissue, stem cells and bone marrow
    • Vendor Section
    • All other topics
  • BloodBankTalk (United Kingdom)
    • Haemovigilance
    • Quality
    • UK Guidelines
  • ChemLabTalk
    • General Information
    • Equipment
    • Accrediting Agencies
  • HemeLabTalk
    • General Information
    • Accrediting Agencies
  • MicroLabTalk
    • General Information
    • Quality
  • POCTalk
    • General Information
    • Accrediting Agencies
    • Computer Systems
    • Education / Quality
    • Equipment
    • Vendor Selection

Blogs

  • PathLabTalk News

Categories

  • User Submitted
    • Audit checklists
    • Direct Observation Checklists
    • Educational Materials
    • Forms
    • SOPs
  • United States
    • FDA Blood Guidances
    • FDA Memorandum to Blood Establishments
  • Canada
    • Health Canada

Categories

  • BloodBankTalk
  • ChemLabTalk
  • HemeLabTalk
  • MicroLabTalk
  • POCTalk
  • General Lab

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Interests


Biography


Location


Occupation


Real Name

Found 11 results

  1. We currently have a 50 year old male in house that had an accident that damaged his foot 3 weeks ago. He arrived septic and has had to have an amputation. His ABO/Rh gives a B pos with a 4+ anti-D. His gel screen and panel give 1+ results that match up with an anti-D (all others rules out). His autocontrol was positive at 1+ by IgG, neg for compliment. The eluate results matched the original antibody ID. Presently this patient's specimen is on its way to our reference lab. Previous history at another facility lists him as B Pos, screen negative. As far as we know, he has never been transfused. What are the possibilities (for what appears to be an D auto antibody), and how should he be treated? Scott
  2. Has anyone seen an Anti-D go from negative to 2+ positive to negative? We had negative antibody screens on an elderly A Negative woman from 2012 through 2018. 8 RBCs were transfused during this time. In August 2018, the antibody screen was 2+ positive, Anti-D was identified, and she received 1 RBC. In April 2019, the antibody screen was negative on 2 different occasions. The possibility of the August 2018 specimen being the wrong patient seems unlikely since we use hand-labeled separately armbanded specimens. However, I have never seen a true Anti-D behave this way.
  3. Hi All, I was wondering if antibody titre is performed on a pregnant mother who previously had HDFN. According to the books, it mentions 'After the first affected pregnancy, the antibody titer is no longer useful'. Therefore does it mean that it doesn't matter what the antibody titre level is, and should be referred to fetal medicine specialist regardless? Or if there is more to this, I would be grateful for some enlightenment
  4. Mrs X Para 2+1 with dichorionic diamniotic twins. Anti-D+G present Anti-D quantitation levels at 13+2 and 29+3 weeks were 21IU/mL-1 and 330IU/mL-1 respectively. Mum O RhD Positive rr, Dad A Rh D Positive R2Ro Twin 1: A RhD Positive DAT 4+, did not go over 1.5MoMs on middle cerebral artery Doppler peak systolic velocity surveillance and did NOT require IUT. Postnatally only required top up Tx’s Twin 2: O RhD Positive R2r DAT 4+. required three intrauterine transfusions. Postnatally required Exchange Tx, IVIg and phototx and serial top-ups Although both twins in this case were RhD positive only one was severely affected. What are the possible reasons / theories to explain this disparity? According to Mollison there are 3 circumstances the fetus may be unaffected or only mildly affected despite a strong positive result in a cellular bioassay. These are: 1. Fetus Rh D Negative 2. Presence of Fc receptor blocking antibodies 3. Diminished transport of maternal IgG to the fetus Are there any other suggestions theories or advice?
  5. What are other people's institutions practices on the following. If you have a patient with an anti-D do you need to go ahead and carry out the D antigen typing on the patients rbcs through the IAT phase(weak D testing)? The AABB 18TH ed. Technical Manual states on pg. 327 "When the D type of a patient is determined, a weak D test is not necessary except to assess the red cells of an infant whose mother is at risk of D immunization." It then goes on to say under Identification of Antibodies to Red Cell Antigens pg.401 "Determining the phenotype of the autologous red cells is an important part of antibody identification." We use MTS gel for as our primary method for blood type determination and it states that Most weak D antigen expressions will be detected(which means not all), however partial DVI epitope variant of the D antigen will not be detected with this monoclonal reagent. Not that it really changes how we transfuse the patient but just curious to others procedures/thoughts. Thanks in advance.
  6. Hi all, I'm trying to find out the similarities and differences around the world (but particularly in Europe) for guidelines related to measuring fetomaternal haemorrhages and issue of anti-D. I'm particularly interested in which countries issue anti-D and don't estimate the FMH, what formulas countries use for calculating doses, what tests different countries use, whether the FMH is measured in whole blood or packed cells, whether different countries use the 1.22 muiltiplier to account for the different sizes of red cells... Not a small list I know. I've found a few international guidelines already so here are some useful links UK guidelines for all Transfusion related things are here http://www.b-s-h.org.uk/guidelines/ Irish guideline on the use of Anti-D http://www.hse.ie/eng/about/Who/clinical/natclinprog/obsandgynaeprogramme/antidprevrhd.pdf Australian guideline on the use of anti-D https://www.ranzcog.edu.au/RANZCOG_SITE/media/DOCMAN-ARCHIVE/Guidelines for the use of Rh(D) Immunoglobulin (Anti-D) (C-Obs 6) Review November 2015.pdf Australia/New Zealand guideline on measurement of FMH https://www.anzsbt.org.au/data/documents/guidlines/ANZSBTguide_Nov02a.pdf Canadian guideline on the use of anti-D https://sogc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/133E-CPG-September2003.pdf Please add links to this forum Many thanks, Katy Veale
  7. How long does RHIG really persist? The package insert says one thing, but with Rh-loving methods such as solid phase, I feel like I see RHIG hang around a lot longer. I think this has implication for pregnant mothers who have suffered from trauma or miscarriage prior to their current pregnancy. Thoughts?
  8. Hi All, So I would like to present a scenario that happened to me and get your input. I received a specimen from the ED for ABO/Rh testing on a young female (she had a miscarriage, which at the time I was not aware). We use the BD Pink (EDTA) blood bank tubes for all of our blood bank testing, this particular sample was about a little more than 1/4 of the way full (yes not the best sample, learned my lesson with this case) - there were no visible clots in the tube or in the cell suspension I made for testing (testing was done fairly quickly since it was only an ABO/Rh and we use a STATSpin centrifuge so I had results out within 20mins of it being collected). These were my initial reactions at time of testing: Anti-A: 0 Anti-B: 4+ Anti-D: w1+ D Control: 0 A1 Cells: 4+ B Cells: 0 Du: 3+ Du Control: 0 CCC: 3+ So of course my interpretation was B Positive, which was reported. (We use the monoclonal Anti-D) All of our samples are retested by another technologist if we have no previous history on the patient. The samples sit at room temperature until they are tested and this was one was retested roughly 10 hours after my initial testing, these are the results: Anti-A: 0 Anti-B: 4+ Anti-D: 0 D Control: 0 A1 Cells: 4+ B Cells: 0 Du: 0 CCC: 3+ Du Control: 0 CCC: 3+ Interpretation: B Negative It was tested 2 more times by two other techs later that morning and the report corrected and the patient had to be called back to get Rhogam injection. So of course and event report was initiated at that point for root cause analysis. I was approached 3 days later after knowing nothing about what happened and told that I "miss-typed" a patient sample. After reviewing the work card I of course said No I didn't because I actually remember working on this particular sample due to the fact that the D got stronger at AHG phase. I was extremely puzzled by the results and pulled the sample at this point had been in the refrigerator for 3 days and found that the same had numerous large clots and lots of visible small clots in my cell suspension (however none of the previous techs noted or expressed this to my director). I performed (3 days later) a forward and reverse typing (B Neg), DAT, and IAT. The DAT (IgG and Poly) - Both negative (very sticky microscopically) and IAT in Gel was completely negative. So at this point it was very perplexing as to what happened with the Anti-D. Of course everyone my boss talked to said that this was impossible for the Anti-D to just disappear (I was not inferring that it disappeared to her) and I must have done something wrong, which really aggravates me to use the word "impossible" in medicine. She said it was more logical that I mixed the control tube and the Anti-D tube at the AHG phase when I read the tubes which makes absolutely no sense to me (if the results were reversed from the results I got at immediate spin, then yes that would make sense and I would have questioned the results and started over). OK, so here is my theory as to be the possible cause for this particular scenario has to do with a sub-optimal sample that was in the process of clotting at the time of initial testing - however I can only assume this theory and I know that it didn't interfere with the Anti-A or Control on the forward type, but these are all different antiseras with different blends of antibodies/proteins, etc.. I am thinking that since I didn't see or detect clots when I tested the EDTA sample the first time it is possible that something during the clotting process potentially interfered with the Anti-D causing it to be a false positive. Since the specimen wasn't tested again until 10 hours later when the clotting process was definitely complete there is no way to prove this, unless someone where to have retested it immediately after I performed the first test. We've seen cold autoantibodies disappear after sitting at room temperature due to autoadsorption, who is to say that since the clotting process was complete whatever was causing the interference may have been gone 10 hours later when the full clots formed. My boss refuses to even think this is remotely a possible and I had to have made an error, she said we use to use plain red clotted tubes all the time for blood bank and never had any problems (don't think she is getting that these tubes have no additive and normally the clotting process was a lot faster in plain red tubes with no additive. Then again she also couldn't understand how a clot would get stronger overtime (I wanted to bang my head on the desk with that remark). If I made an error or potentially made an error I would definitely own up to it, but in this instance her suggestion that I switched the test tubes around and reading the control as the patient makes no sense what so ever. Has anyone every encountered anything like this before and what is your thoughts on the potential reason for the various reactions between a 10 hour period? Thanks, -TxLabGuy82
  9. We are dealing with a 24 day old baby who just had his second top up transfusion. He was born at term to an A neg mom who was discovered at that time to have anti-D. Her titer was 32. She had a negative antibody screen at the beginning of the pregnancy but was not tested when she got her 28 week dose of RhIG. The baby was A pos and had a strongly pos DAT. These results triggered us to test the mom and find the anti-D (we don't do routine screens on all OB admits). The baby had a Hct at birth of 40, so a bit low but not worrisome. He was under bili lights for 5 days and went home with a bili of about 9 and was under home bili lights also. Peak bili was 15. Over this time, his Hct slowly drifted downward. It was 30.7 when he was discharged at 5 days old. He was followed as an OP for bili and H&H. He had to come in for a transfusion (his first) when he was 11 days old because his Hct was down to 17. The morning after that transfusion his Hct was 27. Now some two weeks later he had to come back in for another transfusion because his Hct on Saturday was 20.4 and he was acting tired--feeding taking a long time. His retic count is elevated although not as high as it was before the first transfusion. His LDH is normal. His bili is still a bit high at 3.3 but he does not appear jaundiced. His direct bili is normal. After the latest transfusion, they have him up to Hct 26.5 and sent him home again. He still has a pos DAT(although weaker than before) and has anti-D in his plasma. He has gained weight and is developing normally. The MD doesn't think he is losing blood (other than being sampled every 2-3 days for testing). We transfused O negative blood both times from the same donor. Baby has not had any viruses and seems otherwise well. If anyone has ever seen such a case, please let me know what the cause was determined to be. Or I will take our usual wild speculation and ideas of things to look for. There is an idea from the doctor of autoimmune hemolytic anemia. We have not done an eluate on his most recent specimen--there probably aren't many red cells left to test. I would think his bili and his LDH would be higher in AIHA.
  10. Dear All I am writing a paper and I am finding difficulty sourcing a reference for the following statement I am making in the paper. I know I have read it somewhere but for some reason I cannot find it now Background: once an Intrauterine transfusion has happened, the transfusion procedure itself is known to increase antibody levels. Therefore carrying out serial quantitations post IUT are unnecessary as the patient will be closely monitored by MCA Doppler US. Best wishes John
  11. We have a patient who received many units of group/type specific red cells in Jan. of this year. At that time, his antibody screen was negative. His group and type is A, Rh positive using monoclonal typing reagents. The anti-D reactions have been 2+ and 3+. His current specimen shows an anti-E in the plasma and a panagglutinin in the eluate tested in gel, with stronger reactions in the D+ cells. His eluate tested in tube shows a clear anti-D pattern. Could this be a D variant? Auto-anti-D? Should he get Rh negative red cells? Thanks!
×
×
  • 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.