ArticleVox sanguinis2025
Comparison of conventional tube technique with automated gel microcolumn assay for antenatal antibody monitoring.
Article in Vox sanguinis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Red blood cell alloimmunization and pregnancy: Diagnosis and management.Pregnancy (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Comparison of conventional tube technique with automated gel microcolumn assay for antenatal antibody monitoring.Vox sanguinis · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesTimely 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
methodsAltogether, 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.
resultsGMA 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×).
conclusionA 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.
Indexed as
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.