ArticleVeterinary clinical pathology2025
Comparison of Three Feline Crossmatch Methods-Tube, Gel Column, and Immunochromatographic Strip.
Article in Veterinary clinical pathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA pre-transfusion blood crossmatch is recommended to ensure RBC compatibility for previously transfused and transfusion-naïve cats.
objectivesTo compare 3 crossmatch methods and anti-feline globulin (AFG) enhancement for determining RBC compatibility.
methodsProspective study. Major crossmatches were performed using serum from 68 "recipient" cats and RBCs from 44 "donor" cats. Crossmatch methods evaluated include laboratory tube and gel column without and with AFG enhancement and an in-clinic AFG-enhanced immunochromatographic strip.
resultsTube and gel crossmatches were performed for 211 and strip crossmatches for 133 recipient-donor pairs. RBC incompatibilities were noted in at least 1 crossmatch method for 123 recipient-donor pairs. For determination of the degree of incompatibility, there was a correlation between standard and AFG-enhanced crossmatches for both tube and gel (p < 0.001), standard tube and gel (p = 0.002), and AFG-enhanced tube and gel (p < 0.001). Twelve of 46 and 22 of 113 recipient-donor pairs deemed incompatible with tube and gel, respectively, had RBC agglutination noted only with the addition of AFG. RBC incompatibilities were noted on 15 strips, 4 of which were type A-B mismatched. Odds of detecting RBC incompatibility using strip were 2.9 (p = 0.001) and 6.1 (p < 0.001) times greater with each unit increase in the degree of incompatibility detected by standard and AFG-enhanced tube, respectively.
conclusionsThe clinical relevance of any observed RBC incompatibilities, other than known A-B mismatches, is unknown. While the strip crossmatch is simple to perform and interpret, it might not be sufficiently sensitive to detect weaker RBC incompatibilities.
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.