Comparison Between Conventional and Automated Techniques for Blood Grouping and Crossmatching: Experience from a Tertiary Care Centre

• Main Authors: Swarupa Nikhil Bhagwat, Jayashree H Sharma, Julie Jose, Charusmita J Modi
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2015-07-01
• Series: Journal of Laboratory Physicians
• Subjects: automated technique; conventional tube technique; immunohematology; pretransfusion compatibility
• Online Access: http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.4103/0974-2727.163130

Context: The routine immunohematological tests can be performed by automated as well as manual techniques. These techniques have advantages and disadvantages inherent to them. Aims:The present study aims to compare the results of manual and automated techniques for blood grouping and crossmatching so as to validate the automated system effectively. Materials and Methods: A total of 1000 samples were subjected to blood grouping by the conventional tube technique (CTT) and the automated microplate LYRA system on Techno TwinStation. A total of 269 samples (multitransfused patients and multigravida females) were compared for 927 crossmatches by the CTT in indirect antiglobulin phase against the column agglutination technique (CAT) performed on Techno TwinStation. Results: For blood grouping, the study showed a concordance in results for 942/1000 samples (94.2%), discordance for 4/1000 (0.4%) samples and uninterpretable result for 54/1000 samples (5.4%). On resolution, the uninterpretable results reduced to 49/1000 samples (4.9%) with 951/1000 samples (95.1%) showing concordant results. For crossmatching, the automated CAT showed concordant results in 887/927 (95.6%) and discordant results in 3/927 (0.32%) crossmatches as compared to the CTT. Total 37/927 (3.9%) crossmatches were not interpretable by the automated technique. Conclusion: The automated system shows a high concordance of results with CTT and hence can be brought into routine use. However, the high proportion of uninterpretable results emphasizes on the fact that proper training and standardization are needed prior to its use.