全自动血型仪2种不同交叉配血流程比较

Comparison of two different workflows of crossmaching by full-automatic blood grouping instrument

目的通过对供血者标本采用2种不同工作流程,观察交叉配血结果的一致性及所用时间,为临床工作提供最佳的工作流程。方法分别采用供血者压积红细胞标本、供血者稀释为1%悬液红细胞标本和相同的受血者标本在全自动血型仪上进行主侧交叉配血试验,比较全自动血型仪交叉配血结果的一致性。分别比较供血者压积红细胞标本工作流程和供血者稀释为1%悬液红细胞标本工作流程供血者血液标本前处理,标本处理中,标本后处理,及标本全程处理所用的平均时间。结果供血者压积红细胞标本和供血者稀释为1%悬液红细胞标本全自动血型仪交叉配血结果差异无统计学意义(U=0,P>0.05)。供血者压积红细胞标本和供血者稀释为1%悬液红细胞标本工作流程供血者血液标本标本前处理、标本处理中平均用时比较,差异无统计学意义(t=0.692、t=0.562,P>0.05),标本后处理和标本全程处理平均用时差异有统计学意义(t=146.485、t=67.053,P<0.05)。结论供血者稀释为1%悬液红细胞标本工作流程,其标本后处理,标本全程处理所用的平均时间更短,更加适合标本量大的医院在临床工作中使用。

Objective To provide an optimal working process for crossmatching by full-automatic blood typing instrument.Methods Two workflows were applied to crossmatch test by full-automatic blood typing instrument.One was diluting red blood cells of donor samples to concentrate of 1%,the other was detecting directly the donor′s packed red blood cells.Compared consistency and processing time of the two different workflows.Results Cross match results of two workflows were consistent well（U=0,P〈0.05）.The average processing times before testing and undergoing testing were not significantly different（t=0.692,t=0.562,P〈0.05）,whereas the average processing times after testing and throughout testing were significantly different（t=146.485,t=67.053,P〈0.05）.Conclusion The workflow of diluting donor′s sample before testing saved processing time and better suits hospital having a large quantity of specimens.