ABO blood grouping discrepancies in the donor population. (24th March 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Jain, Ashish; Garg, Sachin; Marwaha, Neelam; Sharma, Ratti Ram
• Is Part Of: ISBT science series. Volume 15:Number 2(2020)
• Page Start: 281
• Page End: 285
• Publication Date: 2020-03-24
• Subjects: ABO discrepancies -- alloantibodies -- blood group discrepancies -- blood groups -- weak subgroups; Blood -- Periodicals; Blood -- Transfusion -- Periodicals; Immunohematology -- Periodicals; Immunopathology -- Periodicals; 615.39
• DOI: 10.1111/voxs.12550
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1751-2816

Abstract

Abstract : Background and Objectives: ABO discrepancies occur when the reactions in forward grouping are not corroborative to those in the reverse grouping due to weak subgroups of A and/or B, missing or weak ABO antibodies or unexpected alloantibodies. We aimed to determine the prevalence of ABO discrepancies in our donor population and to know the causes by using a standard classification. Materials and Methods: It was a retrospective study on donor samples. For all the discrepant samples, the ABO and RhD grouping was repeated using tube technique. Adsorption–elution testing was done for detecting weak subgroups of A and B. Antibody screen (3‐cell) and identification (11‐cell) were done by gel technique (Bio‐Rad, Switzerland). Results: We detected 93 (0·064%) ABO discrepancies out of the total 144279 donor samples tested. The ABO discrepancies were due to weak anti‐B antibody (33/93; 35·5%), weak anti‐A antibody and weak subgroups of A (24 each; 25·8% each) and weak subgroups of B (5/93; 5·4%). Agglutination with O cells was observed in 7 (7·5%) samples at room temperature testing. The alloantibodies identified in these samples were anti‐M (5) and anti‐Le a in (1), while the remaining 1 sample was of 'Bombay' (Oh ) phenotype. The autologous control was negative for all the samples. Conclusion: The prevalence of ABO discrepancies in our donor population is 0·064%.