临床交叉配血方法及输血后溶血状况分析

Clinical Cross Matching Method and Analysis of Hemolysis after Blood Transfusion

目的分析临床交叉配血方法及输血后溶血状况.方法收集2017年3月至2018年6月在我院进行输血治疗的110例患者作为观察样本,依照抽签法分为对照组(55例)和实验组(55例),对照组选择凝聚胺法交叉配血,实验组选择微住凝胶法交叉配血,对两组交叉配血相合率、输血后溶血状况进行比较.结果实验组患者的交叉配血准确率、灵敏度均比对照组高,组间作比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);两组交叉配血特异性相比,组间差异不显著(P>0.05);实验组输血后溶血性不良反应发生率及非溶血性发生率均低于对照组,两组具备统计学意义(P<0.05).结论相比于凝聚胺法,微住凝胶法可显著提高临床交叉配血的安全性,减少溶血反应和非溶血反应,具有临床优先选择和大力推广价值.

Objective To analyze the clinical cross matching method and hemolysis after transfusion. Methods A total of 110 patients who received blood transfusion in our hospital from March 2017 to June 2018 were selected as the observation samples. They were divided into control group(55 cases) and experimental group(55 cases)according to balloting method. The control group was selected to receive polyamine method cross matching blood. The experimental group chose the micro gel gel method to cross matching blood, and compared the matching rate of the two groups of cross matching blood and the hemolysis after transfusion. The results of the study were compared with those of the two groups. Results The accuracy and sensitivity of cross matching in the experimental group were higher than those in the control group, and there was significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05);there was no significant difference between the two groups in cross matching specificity(P>0.05);the incidence of hemolytic adverse reactions and non-hemolytic reactions after transfusion in the experimental group were lower than those in the control group, and there was significant difference between the two groups(P<0.05). Conclusion Compared with the method of polyamines, micro gel method can significantly improve the safety of clinical cross matching, reduce hemolysis and non hemolytic reaction, and has the value of clinical priority and promotion.