Exciting times

[BrianD]

Very appropriate for the time of year...Halloween.

i hadn't thought of that but it does meet the holiday theme. the folks asking didn't really have an idea of what they were getting into......

[BldBnker4]

Sorry, but YEP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We have had a few weird antibodies here too.....nothing as exciting as an Anti-Lan or a "Bat." Our claim to fame is the multiples that require us to get blood from rare-donor sources. We have one regular patient that has an Anti-M along with an Anti-U! She is a dialysis patient...gets blood quite regularly! We also have sickle-cell patients with 6 or 7 antibodies that make life exciting (and a bit expensive) too! We have one patient with multiples and an Anti-Chido. And yes....I too am a nerd! A lab-rat nerd! That is what makes us Blood Bankers, right?!

[Mabel Adams]

Am I the only one to notice how close the name Needs is to the word nerds?

[AMcCord]

Am I the only one to notice how close the name Needs is to the word nerds?

OOOh.....good one!

[Malcolm Needs ☆]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:highfive::highfive:

[cbaldwin]

I wholeheartedly agree

I don't think I qualify as a nerd, at least not now. I have a long way to go, but I am learning new things, getting help from all the discussions that are ongoing. Also I still haven't found a really exciting elusive antibody that many of you all have - but we did have one A3 blood group and one Ax blood group in the last few months.

Yes, do count me in one of your wannabes!!

Did the A₃ demonstrate mixed field agglutination? Isn't mixed field agglutination a characteristic of A₃? And did the A_x react with anti-A,B weakly?

Thank you!

[aafrin]

Did the A₃ demonstrate mixed field agglutination? Isn't mixed field agglutination a characteristic of A₃? And did the A_x react with anti-A,B weakly?

Thank you!

I looked up the records. Yes, A3 did demonstrate mixed field (mf) agglutination with anti-A,B (2+). Ax had weak reaction with anti-A,B (+/2+), but the reaction with anti-A was still weaker (0 /w). Also this patient had anti-A1 in serum (+).

The A3 blood group was a 23 year old male pre-employment health check-up patient, whereas the Ax blood group patient was 53 year old male CABG patient. We crossmatched O group blood for him, but his surgery was postponed for some reason(s)?? unknown to us.

[cbaldwin]

I looked up the records. Yes, A3 did demonstrate mixed field (mf) agglutination with anti-A,B (2+). Ax had weak reaction with anti-A,B (+/2+), but the reaction with anti-A was still weaker (0 /w). Also this patient had anti-A1 in serum (+).

The A3 blood group was a 23 year old male pre-employment health check-up patient, whereas the Ax blood group patient was 53 year old male CABG patient. We crossmatched O group blood for him, but his surgery was postponed for some reason(s)?? unknown to us.

Thank you! I am a student and one of the test specimens I've had was an A₃. The clue was the mixed field--all the books say that A₃ demonstrates mixed field. It's nice to know that sometimes the cells do read the books and behave the way they are suppose to! CLB

[Mabel Adams]

I thought I had heard that monoclonal antibodies sometime react more strongly with weak subgroups so some that may previously have reacted only with anti-A,B may react with monoclonal anti-A. Is there much data on the newer reagents making direct comparisons to the polyclonal reagents originally used to define A subgroups?

[Malcolm Needs ☆]

I thought I had heard that monoclonal antibodies sometime react more strongly with weak subgroups so some that may previously have reacted only with anti-A,B may react with monoclonal anti-A. Is there much data on the newer reagents making direct comparisons to the polyclonal reagents originally used to define A subgroups?

You are quite correct Mabel, particularly as some of the monoclonal anti-A,B reagents are, in fect, blends of monoclonal anti-A and monoclonal anti-B. I have been arguing for ages now that, in many cases, it is impossible to assign a definitive sub-group to a patient/donor with modern monoclonal reagents, except with concurrent use of molecular techniques (and that is an expensive waste of money just to get a definitive sub-group, except for research purposes, such as those carried out by such luminaries as Martin Olsson).