A comparative study to assess diagnostic efficacy of micro typing gel technique versus conventional tube technique in blood cross-match in blood bank at a tertiary care hospital

Abstract

In transfusion medicine, cross-matching and compatibility are determined using the conventional tube approach. The goal of the current study is to compare the microtyping gel approach to the conventional tube method for studying blood cross-match. The objective of the study was to assess the compatibility of donor’s blood with recipient blood by microtyping gel technique and conventional tube technique and comparison of advantages and disadvantages of the two techniques. This observational, cross-sectional study investigation was carried out in a tertiary care facility’s blood bank for 1½ years. It was decided to compare the effectiveness of the traditional tube and gel techniques. In the current investigation, we evaluated the age of the study participants and found that the majority of the study participants were male (63.17%) and most of them were between the ages of 21 and 40 years. The men-to-women ratio in this study was 1.71:1. About 2300 blood samples were subjected to compatibility testing using both the traditional test tube technology and the microtyping gel technology. The conventional method and the gel card approach are equivalent in terms of sensitivity and specificity. However, the gel card approach is simple to use, quick, reliable, and allows for the recording of data. The spin saline tube approach, in comparison, takes longer and produces unreliable results. This makes the gel card approach preferable to the conventional method. The findings were examined. Although the conventional tube technology is still regarded as the gold standard for pretransfusion analysis, it nevertheless has several drawbacks and relies on the precise hand–eye coordination of the laboratory staff. We advise using the microtyping gel approach due to its ease of use, stability of outcomes, dispensing of controls and absence of washing process, and equivalent specificity and sensitivity.