BackgroundWhen dogs are transfused, blood compatibility testing varies widely but may include dog erythrocyte antigen (DEA) 1 typing and rarely cross‐matching.ObjectivesProspective study to examine naturally occurring alloantibodies against red blood cells (RBCs) and alloimmunization by transfusion using 2 antiglobulin‐enhanced cross‐match tests.AnimalsEighty client‐owned anemic, 72 donor, and 7 control dogs.MethodsAll dogs were typed for DEA 1 and some also for DEA 4 and DEA 7. Major cross‐match tests with canine antiglobulin‐enhanced immunochromatographic strip and gel columns were performed 26–129 days post‐transfusion (median, 39 days); some dogs had an additional early evaluation 11–22 days post‐transfusion (median, 16 days). Plasma from alloimmunized recipients was cross‐matched against RBCs from 34 donor and control dogs.ResultsThe 2 cross‐match methods gave entirely concordant results. All 126 pretransfusion cross‐match results for the 80 anemic recipients were compatible, but 54 dogs died or were lost to follow up. Among the 26 recipients with follow‐up, 1 dog accidently received DEA 1‐mismatched blood and became cross‐match‐incompatible post‐transfusion. Eleven of the 25 DEA 1‐matched recipients (44%) became incompatible against other RBC antigens. No naturally occurring anti‐DEA 7 alloantibodies were detected in DEA 7− dogs.Conclusions and clinical importanceThe antiglobulin‐enhanced immunochromatographic strip cross‐match and laboratory gel column techniques identified no naturally occurring alloantibodies against RBC antigens, but a high degree of post‐transfusion alloimmunization in dogs. Cross‐matching is warranted in any dog that has been previously transfused independent of initial DEA 1 typing and cross‐matching results before the first transfusion event.
The low intra- and inter-operator variabilities in the caudal vena cava, aorta and caudal vena cava:aorta ratio measurements support their reliability and operator independency. The sonographic assessment of volaemia appears to be a promising non-invasive, repeatable point-of-care ultrasound protocol for assessment and monitoring of blood loss. Further studies are needed to assess the sonographic assessment of volaemia protocol in spontaneously bleeding dogs.
Background Blood typing for the A and B antigens is essential and crossmatching testing is generally recommended before transfusing blood to cats. Objective To evaluate 2 crossmatch (XM) tests. Animals Forty‐nine healthy domestic shorthair cats that had not received a blood transfusion. Methods Prospective study. Blood samples were typed for AB using immunochromatographic and flow cytometric techniques. A gel column (GC) and a feline antiglobulin‐enhanced gel column (AGC) XM tests were used for crossmatching. Results The population included 34 type A, 13 B, and 2 AB cats, with concordant results (r = 1, P < .005) by flow cytometry and immunochromatographic strip kit. The plasma from type A cats had either no or weak anti‐B alloantibodies. The plasma of 12 of 13 type B cats contained strong anti‐A alloantibodies. For crossmatching, plasma to RBC pairings were prepared using the GC (n = 446) and AGC (n = 630) tests. Both methods showed compatibilities in 329 and incompatibilities in 102 pairings including all A‐B mismatches. Additionally 15 pairings showed agglutination by the AGC but not GC method. Fourteen incompatibilities outside the expected A‐B mismatches were only revealed by AGC. Conclusions and Clinical Importance AB typing using immunochromatographic strip is as accurate as laboratory flow cytometry. The 2 XM methods had good agreement with additional incompatibilities being recognized by the AGC XM beyond A‐B incompatibilities. In clinic, feline AB typing and sensitive XM test kits are available and recommended before each transfusion, although the clinical implications of incompatible XM test results and clinical benefits of such crossmatching have not been documented.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.