maryofcalif2005

Hi Megan, While no automated blood bank analyzer is "perfect" (just as no manual screening method is perfect) it is true that there are fewer "nonspecific" reactions on the TANGO's Solid Screen II strip methology than on the Galileo or GalileoEcho Capture R strip methodology. There is a distinct difference in the reagents used on the microwells and the manner in which the allo-antibodies are bound and detected. There are 3rd party white papers of actual side-by-side studies performed in 2008 on these analyzers to support my statement. I don't know if the new owners of the former Biotest TANGO system (Bio-Rad Laboratories) still have access to, or distribute, those particular published articles. I have copies which I'm happy to share, if you'd like. I don't know how many current TANGO users are active on BBT to provide feedback. it will be interesting to see what other responses you get to this thread. I have a clinical lab and donor center background as a Med Tech and previously worked for Biotest, so you might perceive me to be prejudiced. However, I'm no longer employed by Biotest (and no longer working for any blood bank vendor at this time) - so have nothing to gain personally by promoting one system over another. Both are viable and overall, get the job done. If that were not so, many labs today would not have Galileos and Echos, routinely reporting test results, as your lab has today. I am aware of labs who have done side-by-sides of the 3 vendor's instruments and overall, chose the TANGO more because of it's ease of use, than because of a higher level of nonspecific reactions on other systems compared (Echo, Provue). I do not believe that all Galileo and Echo systems are going to "go away", just because the TANGO has a slightly better statistical performance rating on antibody screening tests. As you know, blood banking is not an exact science. It is high complexity testing at its finest, with many nuances involved. Blood bankers, by and large, have strong feelings about the way they do things and don't like any vendor trying to tell them which system is best for their lab. Being a Med Tech myself, I respect that outlook. There are pro's and con's to each test system, and to doing business with a particular vendor that manufactures and supports such a system. You and your team will have to hash that one over and come to your own conclusions. I'm just offering some facts and data, since my general manner of operating and making business decisions is based on gathering sufficient facts and data to make a logical decision, rather than an emotional one because "I like my sales rep". Hope this info is helpful.

Dear Brenda, I felt sad when I read your comments. It is unfortunate that you perceive it to be tacky for another vendor to contact you to offer alternative reagent products as an option, if indeed, the FDA follows through on their statements in the NOIR letter, implements a consent decree and revokes Immucor's license to manufacture one or more of their reagent products. Perhaps this will not occur. Hopefully, for the sake of all involved, it won't. However, there is always potential that it could - particularly since the FDA did this to Abbott back in 1999, once they knew there were sufficient other FDA-licensed, approved methods and vendors available to supply the market with the needed reagent alternatives. Vendors are people, too - just like you. They have lives and families to support -just like you. They have a job to do - just like you. Please respect them for doing it. If you don't want to have other vendor alternatives and are happy paying double the amount for your blood bank reagents year after year to Ortho and/or Immucor (or happy to ask your employer to do so), then okay - that's a choice you make and your right to make it. If your Lab Director supports you on that choice, great. Fortunately, not everyone in the blood banking world sees things as you do. Judge not lest thou be... Mary Carpenter, B.S. MT(ASCP) former Laboratory Director & Donor Testing Center Supervisor

Have you considered looking into the Solid Screen "LISS in a microwell" methodology used on the TANGO system? It has a high degree of specificity without sacrificing sensitivity. The vendor is Biotest Diagnostics based in New Jersey. Their instrument and reagents were FDA approved in 2006. They also have afull line of traditional blood bank reagents FDA approved in the fall of last year.

You may want to contact the Blood Bank Supervisor at Lexington Medical Center who evaluated an Echo and a TANGO. They chose the TANGO system last year. I heard him speak at a presentation at AABB in Montreal this year. He spoke about the fact that Echo missed a number of significant antibodies, which was a concern for them. If you would like the contact info you can email me at maryofcalif2005@yahoo.com.

TANGO optimo analyzer is a third option. It is FDA approved, has been on the market two years longer than the Echo, is modern, ASTM standardized interface and easy to use, immediate access for loading stats, 7 day on board reagent stability and a TOTALLY walkaway system, once you load the tube, and start the test running, the instrument does the rest. you review and release results at the end. Just trying to help get the word out. There seem to be many blood bankers still, who are unaware of the Biotest TANGO option. I'm sure Immucor and Ortho don't like having the competition, however, it's a free country, and it is a wise person who investigates all options before making a five year automation decision that will impact their dept for years to come. It costs less too, when you compare combined total costs of reagents and instrument for a 3 to 5 year purchase commitment.