Canine Recipient Screening

Tocci, Lynel J.

doi:10.1002/9781118933053.ch9

Cited by 3 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another aspect of transfusion medicine that is clearly considered ‘best practice’ is administering type‐specific, crossmatch‐compatible blood to avoid acute haemolytic transfusion reactions 3,4,7,8,11–20,30,33,34 . Although, in an emergency, canine type DEA 1 negative blood is considered acceptable to transfuse to a naïve recipient without first blood typing or crossmatching, compatibility testing must always be performed before transfusion in cats 19,20,30,33–36 .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Third, clients may be declining the use of these tests due to their additional cost, preventing veterinarians from providing this standard of care. Going forward, strategies to work towards improving alignment with ‘best practice’ include informing veterinarians of avenues to obtain affordable blood‐typing and crossmatching kits and providing resources on logistics of performing crossmatches without a commercial kit 30,33,34 . It will also be important for veterinarians to educate clients on the potentially fatal risk of transfusing incompatible blood to their pet, which may improve client acceptance of the costs associated with pre‐transfusion compatibility testing.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is no consensus statement or set of clinical guidelines to outline all aspects of ‘best practice’ in small animal transfusion medicine. However, there are many peer‐reviewed and non‐peer‐reviewed publications that have summarised relevant studies and may, when taken together, approximate what can conclusively be considered ‘best practice’ 3–28,30–34 . Australian veterinary transfusion practices, including sourcing, handling and administering canine and feline blood products, are wholly unreported in the literature.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Transfusion practice in Australia: an internet‐based survey

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To describe small animal transfusion practices in Australia, including access to blood products and frequency of pre‐transfusion compatibility testing and medication administration. Methods An online survey was disseminated to target Australian veterinarians treating dogs and cats. Information collected included demographics, sources of blood products, blood storage, recipient compatibility testing and administration of medications pre‐transfusion. Associations between the use of compatibility tests and premedications were assessed using the χ2 test. Significance was set at P < 0.05. Results A total of 199 Australian veterinarians were included; however, there was some attrition of respondents over the course of the survey. The majority of respondents were in general practice (n = 133/199). Access to fresh whole blood was commonly reported for dogs (n = 179/199) and cats (n = 131/198), whereas blood components were less commonly available (canine red blood cells [RBC], n = 52/199 and plasma, n = 157/199; feline RBC, n = 9/198 and plasma, n = 21/198). Most blood was sourced from the pets of owners affiliated with the veterinary clinic (n = 179/196). The respondents who did not blood type or crossmatch dogs were significantly more likely to use premedication than those who did these tests (both comparisons: P < 0.001). Likewise, the respondents who did not blood‐type cats were significantly more likely to use premedication (P = 0.003); however, there was no association between crossmatching and using premedication in cats (P = 0.183). Conclusion This is the first survey to describe transfusion practices across a variety of practice types throughout Australia. Future work is needed to determine how representative these results are of current transfusion practices across Australia, and if so, what can be done to optimise them.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Transfusion practice in Australia: an internet‐based survey

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During October and November 2013, 40 mL of Donor blood was collected into a 60‐mL syringe containing acid citrate dextrose (ACD) solution from Blood Pack Units (Macopharma, Tourcoing, France) on 3 separate occasions. The anticoagulated blood was immediately centrifuged, the plasma was separated and frozen, and the packed red blood cells (RBCs) were washed 3 times in sterile phosphate‐buffered saline (PBS) . In the intensive care unit under close medical supervision, 10 mL (0.45 mL/kg) of freshly washed Donor packed RBCs were transfused to Recipient via saphenous vein on Days 0, 16, and 37 (Figure ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alloimmunization of a dog erythrocyte antigen 1− dog transfused with weakly dog erythrocyte antigen 1+ blood

Guidetti¹,

Goy‐Thollot

Boisvineau

et al. 2019

Veterinary Internal Medicne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Acute hemolytic transfusion reactions because of dog erythrocyte antigen (DEA) 1 sensitization after mismatched transfusions are serious complications. Dog erythrocyte antigen 1 expression varies from negative to weakly to strongly positive. Objectives To assess alloimmunization after transfusion of weakly DEA 1+ blood to a DEA 1− dog. Animals One DEA 1− recipient and 1 weakly DEA 1+ donor, and 106 control dogs. Methods Long‐term follow‐up study. Matched for DEA 3, 4, 5, and 7, Dal, and Kai 1 and 2, weakly DEA 1+ donor packed red blood cells (RBCs) were transfused 3 times (0.45 mL/kg at Day 0, 16, and 37) to a DEA 1− recipient. Alloantibodies against RBCs from donor and 106 controls were determined in recipient's plasma samples using a commercial antiglobulin‐enhanced immunochromatographic strip and gel tube crossmatches. Alloantibody titers were determined. Results The DEA 1− recipient was sensitized after 16 days to ≥1657 days after transfusion to weakly DEA 1+ and otherwise matched RBCs. Strong to moderate crossmatch incompatibilities were observed between recipient's plasma and all 61 DEA 1+ crossmatched controls. Moderate to weak incompatibilities were also observed to DEA 1− controls. Anti‐DEA 1 and other alloantibodies were detected over the 4.5 year observation period. Conclusions and Clinical Importance Blood from a weakly DEA 1+ donor induces a strong and durable alloimmunization in a DEA 1− recipient dog. Additional alloantibodies developed against yet to be defined RBC antigens. Those results support the recommendation of typing dogs against DEA 1, considering weakly DEA 1+ as immunogenic, and crossmatching all previously transfused dogs.

show abstract

“…Transfusion guidelines have yet to be established for pet swine, but those available for other species strongly recommend blood typing and/or crossmatching as means of minimizing the risk of immune‐mediated hemolytic transfusion reactions 6 . Clinical reports of pigs receiving blood without pretransfusion screening have been published 2 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Validation of a human paper‐based blood typing method for use in pet pigs

Hampton,

Zhu,

Giori

2023

J Vet Emergen Crit Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundEvidence‐based medical practices for pet pigs are needed. EldonCard is a human blood‐typing card shown to be rapid and reliable in identifying blood phenotypes of pet pigs. The objective of this study was to validate EldonCard by determining its reliability, reproducibility, and robustness for its routine use in the clinical setting.Key FindingsTwenty‐four venous blood samples from pet pigs were collected for a prospective in vitro study. Blood genotypes (“EAAA0” and “EAA00”) were identified in 15 samples via polymerase chain reaction (PCR). All samples were phenotyped (“A,” “Aweak,” and “0” or “–”) via EldonCard. Kappa (κ) statistics measured the level of agreement between 2 raters, and between EldonCard and PCR. McNemar's test determined if an association between the blood types and EldonCard or PCR exists, with significance at P < 0.05. Agreement between raters and methods was perfect (60/60 [100%], κ:1, P < 0.001; 15/15 [100%], κ:1, P < 0.001). There was no difference in the proportions of blood groups based on method.SignificanceIn conjunction with previous data, EldonCard is a rapid, accurate, reliable, precise, and robust in‐clinic blood‐typing method for the A0 system of pet pigs. EldonCard is now a validated blood‐typing tool for the A0 system of pet pigs and maybe used for pretransfusion screenings and identification of donors and recipients.

show abstract

Canine Recipient Screening

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

Transfusion practice in Australia: an internet‐based survey

Transfusion practice in Australia: an internet‐based survey

Alloimmunization of a dog erythrocyte antigen 1− dog transfused with weakly dog erythrocyte antigen 1+ blood

Validation of a human paper‐based blood typing method for use in pet pigs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About