Routray Suman S, Ray Gopal K, Sahoo Nirupama, Israel Karunakar Bakki, Tripathy Sukanta, Acharya Devi
Immunohematology and Blood Transfusion, Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, IND.
Transfusion Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Guwahati, IND.
Cureus. 2024 Dec 4;16(12):e75125. doi: 10.7759/cureus.75125. eCollection 2024 Dec.
Background and objective RhD variants show altered D antigen expression, affecting their serological detection. Proper identification is crucial due to potential anti-D antibody formation. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the frequency and characteristics of D variant cases encountered during RhD typing in both blood donors and recipients and the transfusion implications. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of the D variant involving all the donors and patients whose samples were tested for blood grouping. RhD typing was done using monoclonal anti-D reagents via conventional tube technique (CTT) and column agglutination technique (CAT). Weak reactions (≤ 2+) were retested with different antisera. Weak D (Du) testing was conducted on serologically negative RhD results in donors. D variants were suspected based on discrepancies between CTT and CAT, weak reactions with different antisera, positive Du testing in RhD-negative donors, or anti-D alloimmunization in RhD-positive individuals. Data are presented in numbers and percentages. The odds ratio (OR) determining the association between different blood groups and age groups with the D variant in the donor population was calculated. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results D variants were found in 0.11% of donors and 0.039% of patients, with 21.7% being females. In the patient population, all the D variant cases were from surgical patients with transfusion requests; three received RhD-negative units, while seven did not require transfusions. D variants were more common in adult donors (25-44 years), with an 8.5 times higher occurrence in the AB group compared to the A group. Conclusions The D variant has a high prevalence in eastern India. Regional centers should be equipped to accurately identify and differentiate D variants, enabling improved management and effective conservation of RhD-negative units.
RhD变异体表现出D抗原表达改变,影响其血清学检测。由于可能形成抗-D抗体,正确识别至关重要。本研究旨在回顾性分析献血者和受血者RhD分型过程中遇到的D变异体病例的频率和特征及其输血影响。方法:我们对所有进行血型检测的献血者和患者的D变异体进行了回顾性分析。使用单克隆抗-D试剂通过传统试管技术(CTT)和柱凝集技术(CAT)进行RhD分型。对弱阳性反应(≤2+)用不同抗血清重新检测。对献血者血清学RhD阴性结果进行弱D(Du)检测。根据CTT和CAT之间的差异、与不同抗血清的弱阳性反应、RhD阴性献血者Du检测阳性或RhD阳性个体的抗-D同种免疫来怀疑D变异体。数据以数字和百分比表示。计算确定献血人群中不同血型和年龄组与D变异体之间关联的优势比(OR)。p值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。结果:在0.11%的献血者和0.039%的患者中发现了D变异体,其中21.7%为女性。在患者群体中,所有D变异体病例均来自有输血需求的外科患者;3例接受了RhD阴性单位血液,7例不需要输血。D变异体在成年献血者(25 - 44岁)中更常见,AB组的发生率比A组高8.5倍。结论:D变异体在印度东部患病率较高。区域中心应具备准确识别和区分D变异体的能力,以改善管理并有效保存RhD阴性单位血液。