Gammon RR, Conceicao M, Benitez N, Bright F, Counts K, Resto C, Rexer K. Comparison of RhD Typing Results by Serology and Molecular Methods.
Lab Med 2023;
54:190-192. [PMID:
36124749 DOI:
10.1093/labmed/lmac097]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
Molecular testing determines D antigen status when abnormal serologic results are observed. Molecular testing is routinely batched, resulting in longer turnaround time for abnormal D status resolution. During the interim, obstetric patients with questionable/uninterpretable and weak D typing results by serology, per the immunohematology reference laboratory (IRL) policy, will receive RhD negative blood. This study aimed to determine whether serology results achieved a concordance.
METHODS
Six hospitals provided samples to the IRL (first IRL) for RhD status by DNA. De-identified samples were sent for serology RhD (second IRL). A concordance of ≥80% was acceptable.
RESULTS
Forty-nine samples were evaluated. Results were concordant (65.3% [32/49]) and discordant (34.7% [17/49]). This is significantly lower than clinically acceptable 80% (z = 2.57, P < .05). The turnaround-time was 3.0 hours for serology and 4.4 days for molecular evaluation.
CONCLUSION
Due to a low concordance, serology could not be used in place of molecular testing.
Collapse