search for




 

Evaluation of the Automated Blood Bank Systems Galileo NEO and QWALYS-3 for ABO-RhD Typing and Antibody Screening
ABO 및 RhD 혈액형 검사와 항체 선별검사를 위한 혈액은행
자동화장비 Galileo NEO와 QWALYS-3의 평가
The Korean Journal of Blood Transfusion 2014;25:235−242
Published online December 30, 2014
© 2014 The Korean Journal of Blood Transfusion.

Mi-Ae Jang, Jong Won Oh, Seung-Tae Lee, Ji Young Seo, Dae-Won Kim
장미애ㆍ오종원ㆍ이승태ㆍ서지영ㆍ김대원

Department of Laboratory Medicine and Genetics, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 진단검사의학과
Received November 21, 2014; Revised December 12, 2014; Accepted December 15, 2014.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
Background: An automation system for ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening has been developed and its use is increasing. We compared the results of ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening tests using the manual (ABO-RhD typing) or semiautomated (antibody screening) method and with the automation instruments Galileo NEO (Immucor Gamma, Norcoss, USA) and QWALYS-3 (DIAGAST, Loos Cedex, France). Methods: A total of 332 blood samples were tested for ABO-RhD typing in comparison with routine manual tests, and 236 samples for antibody screening in comparison with DS-Screening II (Bio-Rad Laboratories, 1785 Cressier FR, Switzerland). We evaluated the performance of Galileo NEO and QWALYS-3 in terms of concordance, carryover, and sensitivity test for ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening. Results: The concordance rates of ABO-RhD typing results between the manual methods and the two instruments were 99.4% for Galileo NEO and 99.1% for QWALYS-3, respectively. On antibody screening tests, a concordance rate of 97.9% was observed between the semiautomated method and Galileo NEO or QWALYS-3, because of discordance in five specimens. The carryover was not observed for ABO-RhD typing and antibody screening. The overall sensitivity of the two automation instruments appears to be parallel with that of DS-Screening II except for anti-E. Conclusion: The Galileo NEO and QWALYS-3 system showed good performance, it can be used with confidence for routine pre-transfusion testing in the blood bank. (Korean J Blood Transfus 2014;25:235-242)

 

Keywords : ileo NEO, QWALYS-3, ABO-RhD typing, Antibody screening, Automation

 

April 2018, 29 (1)
Full Text(PDF) Free

Social Network Service

Cited By Articles
  • CrossRef (0)
Services