2023
DOI: 10.1111/trf.17691
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

RHD‐negative red cells may be avoided for patients with ambiguous serologic typing for the RHD antigen

David Juhl,
Kathrin Luckner,
Christian Brockmann
et al.

Abstract: Background and ObjectivesSerologic typing with monoclonal anti‐D is mandatory for RHD antigen determination before transfusion, but due to aberrant (weak or partial) variants of RHD, results may be ambiguous and molecular RHD‐typing is required. Before that, RHD‐negative (RHD –) red blood cells concentrates (RBCs) shall be transfused to avoid anti‐D formation, which probably leads to wastage of RHD ‐ RBCs.Study Design and MethodsAll patients with ambiguous results in serologic RHD‐typing and molecular RHD‐typi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From our experience, the most reported RhCE typing ambiguities in a clinical context are ceSL/CE (RHCE*01. [4,11,[30][31][32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…From our experience, the most reported RhCE typing ambiguities in a clinical context are ceSL/CE (RHCE*01. [4,11,[30][31][32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From our experience, the most reported RhCE typing ambiguities in a clinical context are ceSL/CE ( RHCE*01.10/*04 ) or CeJAHK/cE ( RHCE*02.03/*03 ); Ce(667)/ce(W16C) ( RHCE*02.22/*01.01 ) or Ce/ceMO ( RHCE*02/*01.07 ); CE/ceMo ( RHCE*04/*01.07 ) or Ce(667)/cE ( RHCE*02.22/*03 ); ceHAR/Ce ( RHCE*01.22/*02 ) or CeVA/ce ( RHCE*02.04/*01 ); and ceMo/CE ( RHCE*01.07/*04 ) or Ce(667)/cE ( RHCE*02.22/*03 ) [ 4 , 11 , 30 , 31 , 32 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%