对凝聚胺法与微柱凝胶法两种交叉配血方法阳性结果的研究分析

Study and Analysis of Positive Results of Two Methods of Cross-matching with Condensed Amine Method and Micro-column Gel Method

目的探讨凝聚胺法(MPT)与微柱凝胶法(MGT)交叉配血阳性结果比较分析。方法选取该院自2016年1月-2019年1月申请输血患者108例作为研究样本,分别采用凝聚胺法和微柱凝胶法作交叉配血,对两种交叉配血方法的配血结果进行对比。结果凝聚胺法检测出7例阳性样本,主侧凝聚、次侧凝聚、假阳性分别为2例、4例、1例,明显低于另一组(χ^2=11.083,P<0.05);凝聚胺法的总阳性检出率为6.48%,明显低于微柱凝胶法的12.04%(χ^2=9.282,P<0.05);凝聚胺法交叉配血相合数为101例,相合率为93.52%,明显高于微柱凝胶法,凝聚胺法交叉配血不相合数为7例,不相合率为6.48%,明显低于为微柱凝胶法(χ^2=11.071, P<0.05);凝聚胺法的平均检测时间(11.5±2.3)min明显低于微柱凝胶法(29.6±3.6)min(t=9.271,P<0.05)。结论凝聚胺法配血速度快,但检出率低于微柱凝胶法,微柱凝胶法配血时间较长,阳性检出率较高,具有较高的敏感性。

Objective To investigate the comparative analysis of the positive results of cross-matching with polyamine method(MPT)and microcolumn gel method(MGT).Methods A total of 108 patients who had applied for transfusion in the hospital from January 2016 to January 2019 were selected as the study samples.The conjugated amine method and the micro-column gel method were used for cross-matching,and the blood matching method for the two cross-matching methods.The results were compared.Results Seven positive samples were detected by condensed amine method.The main side cohesion,sub-side cohesion and false positive were 2 cases,4 cases,and 1 cases,respectively,which were significantly lower than the other group(χ2=11.083,P<0.05).The total positive detection rate was 6.48%,which was significantly lower than 12.04%of the microcolumn gel method(χ2=9.282,P<0.05).The number of cross-matching blood combined with condensed amine method was 101 cases,and the coincidence rate was 93.52%,which was significantly higher than that of microcolumn gel method,condensed amine method cross-matching blood mismatch number was 7 cases,the disjoint rate was 6.48%,significantly lower than the micro-column gel method(χ2=11.071,P<0.05);the average detection time of condensed amine method(11.5±2.3)min was significantly lower than the microcolumn gel method(29.6±3.6)min(t=9.271,P<0.05).Conclusion The condensed amine method has a fast blood binding rate,but the detection rate is lower than that of the microcolumn gel method.The microcolumn gel method has a longer blood matching time and a higher positive detection rate,which has higher sensitivity.