常规试管技术与自动凝胶微柱法产前抗体监测的比较。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 HEMATOLOGY
Vox Sanguinis Pub Date : 2025-04-29 DOI:10.1111/vox.70042
Kati Sulin, Mikko Arvas, Suvi Toivonen, Katri Haimila, Jaana Mättö, Inna Sareneva, Riina Jernman, Anna Parhamaa, Susanna Sainio
{"title":"常规试管技术与自动凝胶微柱法产前抗体监测的比较。","authors":"Kati Sulin, Mikko Arvas, Suvi Toivonen, Katri Haimila, Jaana Mättö, Inna Sareneva, Riina Jernman, Anna Parhamaa, Susanna Sainio","doi":"10.1111/vox.70042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Timely identification of pregnancies at risk of severe haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) requires accurate and reproducible antibody titration. This study aimed to establish a critical titre for the gel microcolumn assay (GMA) corresponding to the critical titre of ≥16 for the conventional tube technique (CTT) and to evaluate GMA's suitability for routine antenatal antibody titration.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Altogether, 147 antenatal plasma samples with clinically significant antibodies were studied, including eight pregnancies requiring intrauterine transfusions (IUTs). Twofold serial dilution titres with CTT were made in parallel with automated GMA. Single-dose red blood cells were used with a concentration of 3.5% for CTT and 0.8% for GMA. The critical titre for GMA was compared with CTT as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GMA titres were on average 2.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.72-3.05) dilutions higher than CTT titres. At a CTT titre of 16, the sensitivity and specificity of GMA titration were maximum (94%, 95% CI: 81-99 and 92%, 95% CI: 85-96, respectively) at a titre of 128, but one of the eight fetuses (12.5%) requiring IUTs would have been missed. At a GMA titre of ≥64, sensitivity and specificity were 100% (95% CI: 100-100) and 77% (95% CI: 68-84) respectively, but the number of pregnancies requiring clinical monitoring more than doubled (2.5×).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A GMA titre ≥64 could be considered a safe critical value for high-risk assessment. Despite being a fully automated method benefiting the screening laboratory, the additional workload and costs caused by unnecessary monitoring at delivery hospitals were unacceptable.</p>","PeriodicalId":23631,"journal":{"name":"Vox Sanguinis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of conventional tube technique with automated gel microcolumn assay for antenatal antibody monitoring.\",\"authors\":\"Kati Sulin, Mikko Arvas, Suvi Toivonen, Katri Haimila, Jaana Mättö, Inna Sareneva, Riina Jernman, Anna Parhamaa, Susanna Sainio\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/vox.70042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Timely identification of pregnancies at risk of severe haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) requires accurate and reproducible antibody titration. This study aimed to establish a critical titre for the gel microcolumn assay (GMA) corresponding to the critical titre of ≥16 for the conventional tube technique (CTT) and to evaluate GMA's suitability for routine antenatal antibody titration.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Altogether, 147 antenatal plasma samples with clinically significant antibodies were studied, including eight pregnancies requiring intrauterine transfusions (IUTs). Twofold serial dilution titres with CTT were made in parallel with automated GMA. Single-dose red blood cells were used with a concentration of 3.5% for CTT and 0.8% for GMA. The critical titre for GMA was compared with CTT as the gold standard.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>GMA titres were on average 2.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.72-3.05) dilutions higher than CTT titres. At a CTT titre of 16, the sensitivity and specificity of GMA titration were maximum (94%, 95% CI: 81-99 and 92%, 95% CI: 85-96, respectively) at a titre of 128, but one of the eight fetuses (12.5%) requiring IUTs would have been missed. At a GMA titre of ≥64, sensitivity and specificity were 100% (95% CI: 100-100) and 77% (95% CI: 68-84) respectively, but the number of pregnancies requiring clinical monitoring more than doubled (2.5×).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A GMA titre ≥64 could be considered a safe critical value for high-risk assessment. Despite being a fully automated method benefiting the screening laboratory, the additional workload and costs caused by unnecessary monitoring at delivery hospitals were unacceptable.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23631,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vox Sanguinis\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vox Sanguinis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/vox.70042\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vox Sanguinis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/vox.70042","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:及时识别有严重胎儿和新生儿溶血性疾病(hddn)风险的妊娠需要准确和可重复的抗体滴定。本研究旨在建立凝胶微柱法(GMA)的临界滴度,与常规试管法(CTT)的临界滴度≥16相对应,并评价GMA在常规产前抗体滴定中的适用性。材料与方法:共收集147份含有临床显著抗体的产前血浆样本,包括8例需要宫内输血的孕妇。CTT串联稀释滴度与自动GMA平行。采用单剂量红细胞,CTT浓度为3.5%,GMA浓度为0.8%。将GMA的临界滴度与CTT作为金标准进行比较。结果:GMA滴度平均比CTT滴度高2.88倍(95%可信区间[CI]: 2.72 ~ 3.05)。CTT滴度为16时,GMA滴定的灵敏度和特异性在滴度为128时最高(分别为94%,95% CI: 81-99和92%,95% CI: 85-96),但需要IUTs的8个胎儿中有1个(12.5%)会被遗漏。GMA滴度≥64时,敏感性和特异性分别为100% (95% CI: 100-100)和77% (95% CI: 68-84),但需要临床监测的妊娠数增加了一倍以上(2.5倍)。结论:GMA滴度≥64可作为高危评估的安全临界值。尽管这是一种有利于筛查实验室的全自动方法,但在分娩医院进行不必要的监测所造成的额外工作量和成本是不可接受的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Comparison of conventional tube technique with automated gel microcolumn assay for antenatal antibody monitoring.

Background and objectives: Timely identification of pregnancies at risk of severe haemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) requires accurate and reproducible antibody titration. This study aimed to establish a critical titre for the gel microcolumn assay (GMA) corresponding to the critical titre of ≥16 for the conventional tube technique (CTT) and to evaluate GMA's suitability for routine antenatal antibody titration.

Materials and methods: Altogether, 147 antenatal plasma samples with clinically significant antibodies were studied, including eight pregnancies requiring intrauterine transfusions (IUTs). Twofold serial dilution titres with CTT were made in parallel with automated GMA. Single-dose red blood cells were used with a concentration of 3.5% for CTT and 0.8% for GMA. The critical titre for GMA was compared with CTT as the gold standard.

Results: GMA titres were on average 2.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.72-3.05) dilutions higher than CTT titres. At a CTT titre of 16, the sensitivity and specificity of GMA titration were maximum (94%, 95% CI: 81-99 and 92%, 95% CI: 85-96, respectively) at a titre of 128, but one of the eight fetuses (12.5%) requiring IUTs would have been missed. At a GMA titre of ≥64, sensitivity and specificity were 100% (95% CI: 100-100) and 77% (95% CI: 68-84) respectively, but the number of pregnancies requiring clinical monitoring more than doubled (2.5×).

Conclusion: A GMA titre ≥64 could be considered a safe critical value for high-risk assessment. Despite being a fully automated method benefiting the screening laboratory, the additional workload and costs caused by unnecessary monitoring at delivery hospitals were unacceptable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Vox Sanguinis
Vox Sanguinis 医学-血液学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
156
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Vox Sanguinis reports on important, novel developments in transfusion medicine. Original papers, reviews and international fora are published on all aspects of blood transfusion and tissue transplantation, comprising five main sections: 1) Transfusion - Transmitted Disease and its Prevention: Identification and epidemiology of infectious agents transmissible by blood; Bacterial contamination of blood components; Donor recruitment and selection methods; Pathogen inactivation. 2) Blood Component Collection and Production: Blood collection methods and devices (including apheresis); Plasma fractionation techniques and plasma derivatives; Preparation of labile blood components; Inventory management; Hematopoietic progenitor cell collection and storage; Collection and storage of tissues; Quality management and good manufacturing practice; Automation and information technology. 3) Transfusion Medicine and New Therapies: Transfusion thresholds and audits; Haemovigilance; Clinical trials regarding appropriate haemotherapy; Non-infectious adverse affects of transfusion; Therapeutic apheresis; Support of transplant patients; Gene therapy and immunotherapy. 4) Immunohaematology and Immunogenetics: Autoimmunity in haematology; Alloimmunity of blood; Pre-transfusion testing; Immunodiagnostics; Immunobiology; Complement in immunohaematology; Blood typing reagents; Genetic markers of blood cells and serum proteins: polymorphisms and function; Genetic markers and disease; Parentage testing and forensic immunohaematology. 5) Cellular Therapy: Cell-based therapies; Stem cell sources; Stem cell processing and storage; Stem cell products; Stem cell plasticity; Regenerative medicine with cells; Cellular immunotherapy; Molecular therapy; Gene therapy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信