saralm88 Posted July 18, 2018 Share Posted July 18, 2018 Hi friends! I just wanted to get a feel for what different labs are using. We have the Echo and Neo (new) and have been using LISS for screens and xm. I am switching to using PEG because Immucor says it is the best to use when having the machines. What does everyone else use out there? I hope everyone is having a great summer! I look forwards to hearing from you - hopefully I can get on here more and give more input of my own! Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COTTONBALL Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 21 hours ago, saralm88 said: Hi friends! I just wanted to get a feel for what different labs are using. We have the Echo and Neo (new) and have been using LISS for screens and xm. I am switching to using PEG because Immucor says it is the best to use when having the machines. What does everyone else use out there? I hope everyone is having a great summer! I look forwards to hearing from you - hopefully I can get on here more and give more input of my own! Thanks! Hello. We also use the Echo (Liss) as primary method, and PEG tube testing as secondary method. For crossmatch through Coombs, we use PEG as potentiator. Forgive me, for I have been in the business 3 decades next month. The use of current terminology, I am still working on. cottonball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exlimey Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 22 hours ago, saralm88 said: Hi friends! I just wanted to get a feel for what different labs are using. We have the Echo and Neo (new) and have been using LISS for screens and xm. I am switching to using PEG because Immucor says it is the best to use when having the machines. What does everyone else use out there? I hope everyone is having a great summer! I look forwards to hearing from you - hopefully I can get on here more and give more input of my own! Thanks! PEG-IAT is arguably the most sensitive tube test currently in widespread use. For this reason you're more likely to see concurrence with your Echo/Neo results if you use PEG for supplementary testing, i.e., the sensitivity of the two assays are perhaps the closest (LISS being less-sensitive). However, there's still a chance that the Echo/Neo will detect something that is not detected in PEG (or LISS). I wonder what Immucor would say if you decided to use another manufacturer's PEG reagent ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cterranova Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 We have had the Echo since 2009 and have found that PEG is our go to tube method. It has worked well for the questionable nonspecific iffy capture results. PEG is positive when we repeat the screen and it truly is a clinically significant antibody but negative most times confirming our thoughts that there was really nothing there in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Saikin Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 I use PeG as backup for gel testing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMcCord Posted July 19, 2018 Share Posted July 19, 2018 Our primary method is the Echo. I use PeG for tube testing, with LISS available for working with warm autoantibodies that love PeG and solid phase too much. exlimey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exlimey Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 14 hours ago, AMcCord said: Our primary method is the Echo. I use PeG for tube testing, with LISS available for working with warm autoantibodies that love PeG and solid phase too much. Isn't it fascinating that we're "allowed" to deliberately use a less-sensitive assay when "we" feel it appropriate? Offhand, I can't think of anything similar in other path disciplines. Anyone ? Anyone ? And..... go........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnv Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 You use a less sensitive assay method to reduce interference with cold and warm auto antibodies that you have shown or proven are not clinically significant, with the idea that a clinically significant allo antibody like Kell, if present, will shine through. It's a balancing act. jnadeau 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exlimey Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 58 minutes ago, Johnv said: You use a less sensitive assay method to reduce interference with cold and warm auto antibodies that you have shown or proven are not clinically significant, with the idea that a clinically significant allo antibody like Kell, if present, will shine through. It's a balancing act. Thank you, Johnv. I know the science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMcCord Posted July 20, 2018 Share Posted July 20, 2018 6 hours ago, exlimey said: Isn't it fascinating that we're "allowed" to deliberately use a less-sensitive assay when "we" feel it appropriate? Offhand, I can't think of anything similar in other path disciplines. Anyone ? Anyone ? And..... go........ That's why Chemists won't come near Blood Bank -scares the pants off of them. exlimey and galvania 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slsmith Posted July 23, 2018 Share Posted July 23, 2018 We use Ortho gel for screens both manually and automated(Vision). If we need to use tube method we go to PEG or 30 minute saline. > PEG: if the gel screen is weak, doesn't make any sense, shows mix field (often seen with the burn patients) >Saline: warm autos ( a gel screen is performed too, just to keep an eye on reaction strength) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now