Blood Typing and Cross‐Matching

Weinstein, Nicole; Sink, Carolyn A.

doi:10.1002/9781118997246.ch53

Cited by 1 publication

(8 citation statements)

References 27 publications

(31 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In human transfusion medicine, gel column technology has quickly replaced tube crossmatch methodology due to its many advantages, including speed, standardization, smaller sample volume, and enhanced sensitivity and specificity. 25 Although tube crossmatches may be more affordable and accessible to veterinary researchers, gel column crossmatching in veterinary medicine is growing, 6,8 and its application to xenotransfusion across species should be investigated in the future.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4 Crossmatch testing is performed to minimize the risk of immunemediated hemolytic transfusion reactions and alloimmunization, prolong donor RBC life span, and improve blood transfusion efficacy. [5][6][7][8] While blood typing can determine the presence of known RBC surface antigens (ie, alloantigens), crossmatch testing can help determine if a patient has in vitro serological compatibility with a potential blood donor. Major and minor crossmatch testing assesses in vitro serological compatibility between a blood transfusion recipient and a potential blood donor by assessing for hemolysis and agglutination.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…8 A major crossmatch tests for naturally occurring or induced alloantibodies in the recipient's serum or plasma against donor RBCs; conversely, a minor crossmatch tests for naturally occurring or induced alloantibodies in the donor's serum or plasma against recipient RBCs. [5][6][7][8] If hemolysis or agglutination occurs in either crossmatch, a potential in vivo serological incompatibility may exist between the recipient and blood donor. [5][6][7][8] The minor crossmatch is considered less clinically important for component therapy but is recommended when transfusing whole blood or plasma.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[5][6][7][8] If hemolysis or agglutination occurs in either crossmatch, a potential in vivo serological incompatibility may exist between the recipient and blood donor. [5][6][7][8] The minor crossmatch is considered less clinically important for component therapy but is recommended when transfusing whole blood or plasma. 7 Stored canine and feline blood products are frequently available at referral and veterinary specialty centers, making their potential availability for an emergency xenotransfusion to a rabbit recipient likely.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Crossmatch testing is performed to minimize the risk of immune‐mediated hemolytic transfusion reactions and alloimmunization, prolong donor RBC life span, and improve blood transfusion efficacy 5–8 . While blood typing can determine the presence of known RBC surface antigens (ie, alloantigens), crossmatch testing can help determine if a patient has in vitro serological compatibility with a potential blood donor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Major crossmatch compatibility of rabbit blood with rabbit, canine, and feline blood

Dannemiller,

Ozawa,

Petritz

et al. 2024

J Vet Emergen Crit Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveTo evaluate the major crossmatch compatibility between rabbit recipients, rabbit donors, and the major canine and feline blood types.DesignProspective in vitro study in December 2021.SettingAcademic veterinary teaching hospital.AnimalsWhole blood samples were collected from 11 healthy New Zealand White rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) with no previous transfusion history. Three pigtail segments were acquired from dog erythrocyte antigen (DEA)‐1‐positive, DEA‐1‐negative, and feline type A blood units. Whole blood was collected from a healthy type B blood donor cat.InterventionsBlood from each rabbit recipient underwent a major crossmatch using standard tube crossmatch methodology with itself and the following donor blood types: rabbit, DEA‐1‐positive, DEA‐1‐negative, feline type A, and feline type B.Measurements and Main ResultsSelf‐crossmatches and crossmatches between rabbit recipients and conspecific donors were negative for hemolysis and agglutination. Crossmatches between rabbit recipients and canine and feline donors yielded no hemolysis but produced varying degrees of macroscopic and microscopic agglutination. Rabbit recipients had 1.4 (95% confidence interval: 1.1–1.8) times the risk of macroscopic agglutination when major crossmatched with canine blood compared to feline blood. No significant difference in agglutination was found between DEA‐1‐positive and DEA‐1‐negative or feline type A and type B donors.ConclusionsThese findings support allogeneic blood transfusions between rabbits being highly compatible and suggest rabbits have naturally occurring alloantibodies against both canine and feline red blood cells. However, feline red blood cells had a lower rate of in vitro incompatibility on major crossmatch, suggesting potentially higher in vivo compatibility if an emergency xenotransfusion is needed. Further prospective research is needed to determine if xenotransfusion is associated with a higher incidence of acute and delayed transfusion reactions in rabbits than allogeneic transfusions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%