论文部分内容阅读
目的:分析凝聚胺法与微柱凝胶法交叉配血的阳性结果,为临床疑难配血提供参考.方法:选取1 350例临床受血者样本,分别采用凝聚胺法和微柱凝胶法进行交叉配血,统计并分析交叉配血结果.结果:1 350例交叉配血中凝聚胺法有13例不相合(0.96％),微柱凝胶法有41例不相合(3.04％),两者比较差异有统计学意义(P＜0.05),排除64例新生儿样本后,1 286例交叉配血中凝聚胺法有12例不相合(0.93％),微柱凝胶法有18例不相合(1.40％),两者比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).2种方法中由于受血者不规则抗体筛查阳性引起的不相合分别有10例、14例(P＞0.05),由于受血者为新生儿引起的不相合分别有1例、23例(P＜0.05),由于供血者直接抗人球蛋白试验阳性引起的不相合均为2例((P＞0.05),由于肉眼难判断的微弱凝集引起的不相合分别有0例、2例.结论:凝聚胺法交叉配血耗时短成本低、操作简洁,准确度高,适用于抢救时的输血;微柱凝胶法交叉配血适用于新生儿、不规则抗体筛查阳性患者等疑难配血结果的输血、非紧急输血、批量用血等情况.“,”Objective:To analyze the positive result of polybrene test (MPT) and microcolumn gel test (MGT) in blood cross-matching,and provide reference for clinical difficult blood cross-matching.Method:A total of 1 350 cases of blood cross-matching in our hospital were taken by MPT and MGT,and the results were analyzed.Resuit:In the 1 350 cases,13 cases were not matching in MPT (0.96％),41 cases were not matching in MGT (3.04％) (P＜0.05).Excluding the 64 neonatal cases,12 cases were not matching in MPT (0.93％),18 cases were not matching in MGT (1.40％) (P＞0.05).Because of the irregular antibody screening positive of the recipient,10 cases were not matching in MPT,14 cases were not matching in MGT (P＞0.05).Because of that the recipient were neonatal,1 case was not matching in MPT,23 cases were not matching in MGT (P＜0.05).Because of the direct anti-human globulin test of blood donors were positive,2 cases were not mating in MPT or MGT (P＞0.05).Because of the weak agglutination,none was not matching in MPT,2 cases were not matching in MGT.Conclusion:MPT in blood cross-matching might be applicable to emergency patients.MGT in blood cross-matching might be applicable to the neonatal blood transfusion and the recipient who\'s irregular antibody screening is positive,it might be also applicable to the blood transfusion not emergency and lots of blood recipients.