ArticleJournal of blood transfusion2014
Frequencies and specificities of "enzyme-only" detected erythrocyte alloantibodies in patients hospitalized in austria: is an enzyme test required for routine red blood cell antibody screening?
Article in Journal of blood transfusion, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Short-Term Clinical Outcomes of Packed Red Blood Cell Transfusions with Isolated Enzyme-Phase Crossmatch Incompatibility: A Single-Center Cross-Sectional StudyTurkish journal of haematology : official journal of Turkish Society of Haematology · 2023Article
- Management of Wrong Blood Transfusion to an RhD Negative Woman in Labor.International journal of women's health · 2023Article
- Red blood cell alloimmunization among hospitalized patients: transfusion reactions and low alloantibody identification rate.Hematology, transfusion and cell therapyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
unlabelledThe aim of this study was to determine the frequencies and specificities of "enzyme-only" detected red blood cell (RBC) alloantibodies in the routine antibody screening and antibody identification in patients hospitalized in Austria. Routine blood samples of 2420 patients were investigated. The antibody screening was performed with a 3-cell panel in the low-ionic strength saline- (LISS-) indirect antiglobulin test (IAT) and with an enzyme-pretreated (papain) 3-cell panel fully automated on the ORTHO AutoVue Innova System. The antibody identification was carried out manually with an 11-cell panel in the LISS-IAT and with an enzyme-pretreated (papain) 11-cell panel. In total 4.05% (n = 98) of all patients (n = 2420) had a positive RBC antibody screening result. Of them 25.51% (25/98) showed "enzyme-only" detected specific or nonspecific RBC alloantibodies. Rhesus and Lewis system antibodies were found the only specificities of "enzyme-only" RBC alloantibodies: all in all 4.8% (4/98) were detected with anti-E, 3.06% (3/98) with anti-Le(a), 3.06% (3/98) with anti-D after anti-D prophylaxis and 1.02% (1/98) with anti-e. In total, 14.29% (14/98) showed a nonspecific RBC alloantibody result with the enzyme test. The results of the present study demonstrate that a high number of unwanted positive reactions with the enzyme technique overshadows the detection of "enzyme-only" RBC alloantibodies. (
trial registrationK-37-13).
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.