ArticleTransfusion2026
Deceased donor ABO discrepancy due to a rare AwB subgroup: Implications for organ allocation.
Article in Transfusion, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAccurate ABO determination is critical for safe deceased donor organ allocation. Weak or variant ABO subgroups may not be reliably detected by routine serologic testing, especially under urgent conditions or following transfusion. Such limitations can result in discrepant ABO assignments with potential implications for transplant safety. STUDY DESIGN AND
methodsWe describe a deceased organ donor with discordant ABO typing results reported by two laboratories. Serologic testing was performed using gel agglutination methods on independently collected specimens. Due to persistent discrepancies, ABO genotyping was performed using real-time polymerase chain reaction to resolve the donor's blood group.
resultsInitial serologic testing identified the donor as AB RhD+ at one laboratory, while a second laboratory reported B RhD+ results. Repeat serologic evaluation demonstrated weak and variable A antigen reactivity, suggestive of a weak A subgroup. Molecular genotyping performed on specimens from both laboratories identified an AwB genotype, confirming the presence of a weak A allele. Because molecular results were not available prior to organ allocation and the discrepancy could not be resolved in real time, the donor was conservatively classified as AB for allocation purposes. DISCUSSION: This case highlights the vulnerability of routine serologic testing to misclassification of rare weak ABO subgroups. Integration of molecular genotyping with serologic testing can provide resolution of ABO discrepancies and enhance transplant safety. This case demonstrates a policy-relevant gap in current ABO determination workflows for deceased donors. Lack of standardized inter-laboratory data sharing and limited access to rapid molecular testing may unnecessarily restrict organ utilization.
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.