Detection of multiple passively acquired alloantibodies following infusions of IV Rh immune globulin

BACKGROUND: Passively acquired blood group alloantibodies are detected regularly after infusions of IV Rh immune globulin (RhIG) for the treatment of immune thrombocytopenic purpura (ITP) in D+ patients. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Blood samples from 16 D+ patients with ITP were tested after treatment with IV RhIG for the presence of passively acquired alloantibodies. Similar studies were conducted for three D- patients after injections of IM RhIG for Rh immunoprophyl-axis. Four production lots of IV RhIG and 2 lots of IM RhIG were tested for the presence of alloantibodies. RESULTS: All 16 D+ patients with ITP developed a positive DAT, as well as positive antibody detection test results, after infusions of IV RhIG. All postinfusion plasma samples contained anti-D, as well as one or more additional antibodies, usually anti-C, -E, -G, -V, or -Fy(a). Eluates from patients' RBCs with positive DAT results contained multiple passively acquired alloantibodies. Multiple alloantibodies were detected in samples of different production lots of IV RhIG or IM RhIG. No acute transfusion reactions were observed in five D+ patients with ITP who had been treated with IV RhIG and had been given serologically incompatible D+ RBCs. After injections of IM RhIG, the only passively acquired alloantibody detected was anti-D. CONCLUSION: Plasma samples from D+ patients with ITP treated with IV RhIG regularly contained anti-D and multiple other passively acquired Rh, Duffy, or Kidd system alloantibodies. Postinfusion RBC samples all had positive DAT results with eluates containing anti-D and multiple other Rh, Duffy, or Kidd system antibodies. The consistent detection of multiple passively acquired alloantibodies after IV RhIG, in contrast to the detection of anti-D only after IM RhIG, reflects the immediate effect of the entire (bolus) dose of RhIG by the IV route, the dose for treating ITP that is approximately 10 times the dose for Rh immunoprophylaxis, and the expected serologic incompatibility with recipients' D+ RBCs.     

The routine use of Rh-negative reagent red cells for the identification of anti-D and the detection of non-D red cell antibodies

BACKGROUND: Before 1987, fewer than 50 patients per year at the authors' laboratory had a positive antibody detection test due to antepartum Rhesus immunoprophylaxis. However, after 1987, a marked increase was observed in the number of patients who had received Rh immune globulin (RhIG) during pregnancy as part of routine antepartum Rh immunoprophylaxis. In anticipation that an increased use of RhIG during pregnancy would increase the number of patients in whom anti-D was detected by this laboratory, a protocol was developed to abbreviate the process required to identify anti-D. Although this protocol was adopted primarily to address an anticipated increase in antenatal RhIG usage in women, it was also applied to alloimmunized Rh-negative males. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: When an Rh-negative patient (male or female) had a reactive screening test for unexpected antibodies and met certain other criteria, the patient's serum was tested with a three-vial set of Rh-negative reagent red cells (Rh-negative screening RBCs), instead of with panels of typed RBCs (panel RBCs), for the identification of anti- D or the detection of non-D antibodies. If the serum under test did not agglutinate or hemolyze Rh-negative screening RBCs, anti-D was identified and no further testing was performed. If the serum agglutinated or hemolyzed Rh-negative screening RBCs, conventional testing with panel RBCs was done to determine the antibody specificity. RESULTS: Rh-negative patients (n = 1174) who had reactive screening tests for unexpected antibodies were tested with Rh-negative screening RBCs; 1079 were found to have anti-D as a single antibody. Seven of these patients subsequently developed a non-D alloantibody, after transfusion or pregnancy, and one patient had anti-C that escaped detection at the time of initial testing with Rh-negative RBCs (a false- negative result). Ninety-two patients had anti-D in combination with a non-D antibody, and three patients had a non-D antibody but not anti-D. Use of the anti-D identification protocol actually reduced the laboratory workload by 176 College of American Pathologists workload units per month, in spite of a marked increase in the number of patients in whom anti-D was detected. No hemolytic transfusion reaction was attributed to the abbreviation of anti-D identification. CONCLUSION: The identification of anti-D may be abbreviated without jeopardizing patient safety. Such a protocol can reduce laboratory workload and might be particularly appealing to health care facilities that perform antibody detection testing on large numbers of Rh-negative pregnant women, especially if antepartum RhIG is administered routinely.     

Anti-D alloimmunization after D-mismatched allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in patients with hematologic diseases

BACKGROUND: The de novo development of anti-D after D-mismatched allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is a possibility that must be considered. The transfusion of D- blood components after AHSCT has been recommended but anti-D alloimmunization in this setting has been studied little. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze anti-D formation after D-mismatched AHSCT. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Thirty patients with a hematologic disease who underwent D-mismatched AHSCT were retrospectively studied. Support therapy included red blood cells (RBCs) and platelet (PLT) concentrates (PCs) from whole-blood donations and PLTs from apheresis. After AHSCT, patients received D+ PCs without administering Rh immunoglobulin (RhIG). An antibody screening to detect anti-D was performed by low-ionic-strength saline-indirect antiglobulin test with the tube test. RESULTS: Fifteen D+ patients received stem cells (SCs) of D- donors and 15 D- patients received SCs of D+ donors. After AHSCT, patients received a median of 11.5 (range, 0-32) D- RBC units. D+ patients received 682 (83%) of 825 PLT units from D+ donors, and D- patients received 573 (85%) of 678 PLT units from D+ donors. None of the 30 patients developed anti-D after a median follow-up of 32 weeks (range, 4-310 weeks). CONCLUSION: Anti-D alloimmunization after performing a D-mismatched AHSCT is infrequent in patients with hematologic diseases although patients receive D-mismatched PLT transfusions without RhIG administration.     

Platelet transfusions from D+ donors to D- patients: a 10-year follow-up study of 1014 patients

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend that platelets (PLTs) from D? donors should be given to D? patients. However, such evidence comes from studies with a limited number of included patients that reported an incidence of anti‐D alloimmunization to be up to 19%. We thus decided to extend these findings by examining anti‐D alloimmunization at our institution, where PLT transfusions from D+ donors are transfused to D? patients because of logistic constraints. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: From April 1999 to December 2009, we retrospectively reviewed the clinical and transfusion records of all D? patients who received PLT transfusions from D+ donors at our hospital. PLT concentrates (PCs) were obtained from apheresis and from whole blood donations. RhIG was not administered after the transfusion of PCs from D+ donors. The antibody screen test to detect anti‐D was performed by low‐ionic‐strength solution indirect antiglobulin test using the gel test. RESULTS: Our series comprises 1014 D? patients who received 5128 PLT transfusions from D+ donors (89% were pooled PCs). We had 315 (31.1%) patients who had a blood sample to analyze the presence of anti‐D 4 or more weeks after the first D+ PLT transfusion with a median follow‐up of 29 weeks (range, 4‐718 weeks). Anti‐D developed in 12 (3.8%) of these 315 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The frequency of anti‐D alloimmunization of D? patients after receiving pooled PCs from D+ donors is low. The transfusion of D‐incompatible pooled PCs without immunoprophylaxis to D? men or D? women without childbearing potential seems a reasonable and safe alternative.     

Rh 新生儿溶血病的血清抗体分析

目的对20例Rh新生儿溶血病血清抗体回顾性分析。方法采用直接抗人球蛋白试验、游离抗体试验、放散试验检测ABO以外的抗体,采用微柱凝胶间接抗人球蛋白试验进行抗体鉴定。结果20例Rh溶血病患儿中由抗D引起的溶血病有11例,由抗-D和Rh其他系统抗体联合引起的有4例,共15例,占75%;由抗-E引起有3例,由抗-E和抗-c联合引起1例,占20%;由抗-C引起1例,占5%。20例患儿母亲都曾有生产或流产或输血史。结论为预防新生儿Rh溶血病的发生,尤其是对曾有过生产史、流产史或输血史的孕妇作产前夫妇Rh血型和孕妇Rh免疫性血清抗体筛查极有必要。     

Differentiation of anti-D, -C, and -G: clinical relevance in alloimmunized pregnancies

BACKGROUND: The differentiation of anti-D, -C, and -G specificities is seldom considered clinically important in pretransfusion testing. However, distinguishing these antibody specificities in alloimmunized pregnancies may be essential. The clinical prognosis as well as Rh immune globulin prophylaxis depends on the accurate identification of these antibodies. CASE REPORT: A pregnant woman, para 1 gravida 4, who had received Rh immune globulin at appropriate intervals during her previous pregnancies was reported to have anti-D (titer = 4) and anti-C (titer = 32). Differential adsorption and elution studies showed that the patient had anti-C and anti-G, but not anti-D. This case prompted retrospective examination of the sera from six other women with anti-D and anti-C who were referred to a high-risk pregnancy clinic. Of six pregnant women reported to have anti-D and anti-C; two had anti-D, -C, and -G; three had anti-D and -G, but not anti-C; and one had anti-C and -G, but not anti-D. This last is similar to the index case. CONCLUSION: Cases of pregnant women with anti-C and -G, but not anti-D, are not infrequent. Studies to differentiate anti-D, -C, and -G should be performed on alloimmunized pregnant women presumptively identified as having anti-D and anti-C when the medical history (Rh immune globulin prophylactic therapy) and/or titer values (e.g., anti-C titer higher than anti-D titer) suggest that anti-D may not actually be present. Rh immune globulin has not failed in these patients, and they should receive this therapy during pregnancy to prevent immunization to D.     

Platelet transfusion in an infant leading to formation of anti-D: implications for immunoprophylaxis

BACKGROUND: The immature infant immune system rarely makes RBC alloantibodies; however, most studies confirming the absence of alloantibodies in infants have involved transfusions that were matched for one of the most immunogenic antigens, rhesus D. The potential for D- infants to develop anti-D is unknown. Specifically, this issue has not been analyzed for infants receiving whole-blood-derived PLTs from D+ donors. The importance of understanding such risk is underscored by the fact that anti-D formation can be prevented by the administration of Rh immunoglobulin. CASE REPORT: A D- infant with congenital heart disease received two D-mismatched whole-blood-derived PLT units at 17 weeks of age. He did not receive Rh immunoglobulin prophylaxis. Upon a subsequent admission 13 months later, anti-D was identified in his plasma sample. CONCLUSION: The case presented here demonstrates that a young infant can respond to less than 0.6 mL of D+ RBCs and documents the youngest patient to have developed a RBC alloantibody from a PLT transfusion. To prevent anti-D formation, we recommend administering Rh immunoglobulin to all D- pediatric patients that receive PLT transfusions from D+ donors [correction].     

Platelet Transfusion – the Art and Science of Compromise

Summary

Many modern therapies depend on platelet (PLT) transfusion support. PLTs have a 4- to 7-day shelf life and are frequently in short supply. In order to optimize the inventory PLTs are often transfused to adults without regard for ABO compatibility. Hemolytic reactions are infrequent despite the presence of ‘high titer’ anti-A and anti-B antibodies in some of the units. Despite the low risk for hemolysis, some centers provide only ABO identical PLTs to their recipients; this practice might have other beneficial outcomes that remain to be proven. Strategies to mitigate the risk of hemolysis and the clinical and laboratory outcomes following ABO-matched and mismatched transfusions will be discussed. Although the PLTs themselves do not carry the D antigen, a small number of RBCs are also transfused with every PLT dose. The quantity of RBCs varies by the type of PLT preparation, and even a small quantity of D+ RBCs can alloimmunize a susceptible D− host. Thus PLT units are labeled as D+/–, and most transfusion services try to prevent the transfusion of D+ PLTs to D– females of childbearing age. A similar policy for patients with hematological diseases is controversial, and the elements and mechanisms of anti-D alloimmunization will be discussed.KeyWords: Platelets, ABO, Rh, Mismatch, Hemolysis, Alloimmunization, Antibody     

FPTT is a low-incidence Rh antigen associated with a "new" partial Rh D phenotype, DFR

BACKGROUND: Several Rh D phenotypes with partial D antigens are recognized. Some partial D antigens are associated with low-incidence Rh antigens. New partial D antigens are revealed by an atypical pattern of reactions with anti-D. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: The reactions of D variant cells with panels of monoclonal anti-D and with antibodies to low-incidence antigens were compared to those of known D categories to identify a new Rh D phenotype. The inheritance of partial D antigens was studied by Rh phenotyping of the families of the probands. Standard serologic methods were used and family data were analyzed. RESULTS: A new Rh D phenotype, to be called DFR, was identified in 17 probands, two of whom had made anti-D. The partial D antigen carries epD3, epD4, and epD9 and lacks epD8. The presence of other D epitopes is ambiguous; different answers were obtained for the same sample with different monoclonal anti-D of the same apparent epitope specificity. The immunoglobulin class of the anti-D was important: IgG were more successful than IgM monoclonal anti-D in detecting the partial D of DFR. Family studies showed that DFR traveled with Ce more frequently than with cE. The low-incidence antigen FPTT (International Society of Blood Transfusion number 700048) was found on all DFR samples. Family studies demonstrated that FPTT is, as suspected, part of the complex Rh system. CONCLUSION: The partial D of the Rh D phenotype, DFR, is recognized by its pattern of reactions with monoclonal anti-D and its association with the low-incidence antigen FPTT, FPTT has now been numbered Rh50.     

Prevention of D sensitization after mismatched transfusion of blood components: toward optimal use of RhIG

Transfusion of D+ red blood cells (RBCs) into D- recipients, whether through whole blood, RBC, or platelet (PLT) transfusion, can lead to alloimmunization with associated risks of hemolytic reactions from subsequent mismatched transfusion. The incidence of D alloimmunization in various transfused patient populations may be different from that reported in normal subjects or in pregnancy, but prevention of D alloimmunization after mismatched transfusion can be achieved using RhIG. An optimal approach to the use of RhIG, however, has not been identified for the United States. Case histories and studies of volunteers reported over the past 40 years have established that alloimmunization to mismatched RBC transfusion can be successfully prevented with a dose of 20 microg of RhIG per 1 mL of D+ RBCs (per 2 mL of whole blood) when given within a window of opportunity that extends to at least 72 hours. Evidence from prospective studies of RhIG as a therapy for immune thrombocytopenic purpura suggests that such doses can be tolerably given by intravenous injections over short periods, with adverse event rates minimized when pretransfusion medication is given. For mismatched PLT transfusions, the lowest dose of standard preparations of RhIG (e.g., 125 or 300 microg) should be sufficient to prevent alloimmunization given the small D+ RBC volumes involved. This article reviews how our understanding of prevention of alloimmunization in mismatched transfusion has progressed over the years and outlines some practical considerations based on the currently available evidence.     

输血前Rh(D)检测及其在输血中的意义

探讨输血前检测受血Rh血型的意义及对Rh(D)阴性能及时输用同型血或采用自体输血的可能性。对近5年来住院治疗首次申请输血的病人共2168例，在输血前1天进行Rh(D)血型抗原的检测，应用BASO公司生产的IgM抗—D血清，采用试管法进行检测。结果表明：在2168例病人中检测出Rh(D)阴性7例，Rh(D)阴性率占0．32％，其中2例采用自体输血，2例输用ABO同型的Rh(D)阴性血液，3例未输血。结论：输血前检测Rh(D)血型能防止溶血性输血反应；如果病人是Rh(D)阴性，只要身体条件允许可采用自体输血。     

Evaluation of a panel of human monoclonal antibodies to D and exploration of the synergistic effects of blending IgG1 and IgG3 antibodies on their in vitro biologic function

BACKGROUND: The D immunoprophylaxis program has successfully reduced the incidence of Rh hemolytic disease of the newborn (HDN), but it has also reduced the availability of plasma-derived polyclonal anti-D, which constitutes the current therapeutic product. Human monoclonal anti-D from hybridoma cell lines may be an acceptable alternative, and clinical efficacy of each anti-D is being evaluated in several centers. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This study represents the largest assessment (outside of the International Workshops) of human D monoclonal antibodies for potential therapeutic use. The in vitro biologic activity and immunologic and serologic reactivity of a coded panel of 20 D antibodies (THERAD) was investigated. The bioassays used were lymphocyte (K-cell) antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC), monocyte ADCC, and monocyte chemiluminescence, which together reflect the processes involved in antibody-coated red cell destruction in vivo. From this panel, six antibodies (THERADs 14, 19, 22, 23, 27, and 28, comprising 3 IgG1 and 3 IgG3 D monoclonal antibodies) were further selected to investigate the effects of blending in the three bioassays. RESULTS: Several THERAD blends displayed greater activity than their component parts, in the range of 6 to 124 percent. There was no evidence to suggest functional blocking effects with this restricted panel of antibodies. CONCLUSION: The THERAD blends containing both IgG1 and IgG3 anti-D appeared to be the most functionally active, as did blends containing antibodies to two distinct D epitopes. This in vitro evidence has important implications for the future formulation of an effective monoclonal preparation for the prevention of Rh HDN.     

A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model for the action of anti-D immunoglobulin in effecting circulatory clearance of Rh D+ red cells

Summary. A dynamic model of the action of anti-D immunoglobulin in effecting clearance of Rh D-positive red cells from the circulation of D-negative subjects is presented. The pharmacokinetics of the redistribution of anti-D between injection site, intravascular and extravascular spaces following either intramuscular or intravenous administration is included, also the reaction of anti-D with D-positive red cells in the intravascular space and subsequent circulatory clearance of antibody-coated cells. Numerical computer modelling methods have been used to obtain solutions of the model, using kinetic rate constants which have been derived from previously published experimental data. Selected solutions are presented, chosen for their relevance to (i) clinical situations in which anti-D is used to prevent Rh D immunization of D-negative subjects and (ii) determination of some of the properties of anti-D antibodies which are important for effecting circulatory clearance of D-positive red cells.     

To Give or Not to Give: RhD Immunoglobulin for an RHD *39 Pregnant Woman with Sickle Cell Disease

IntroductionPatients with sickle cell disease (SCD) have repeated episodes of red blood cell (RBC) sickling and microvascular occlusion that manifest as pain crises, acute chest syndrome, and chronic hemolysis. These clinical sequelae usually increase during pregnancy. Given the racial distribution of SCD, patients with SCD are also more likely to have rarer RBC antigen genotypes than RBC donor populations. We present the management and clinical outcome of a 21-year-old pregnant woman with SCD and an RHD*39 (RhD[S103P], G-negative) variant.Case PresentationMs. S is B positive with a reported history of anti-D, anti-C, and anti-E alloantibodies (anti-G testing unknown). Genetic testing revealed both an RHD*39 and homozygous partial RHCE*ceVS.02 genotype. Absorption/elution testing confirmed the presence of anti-G, anti-C, and anti-E alloantibodies but could not definitively determine the presence/absence of an anti-D alloantibody. Ms. S desired to undergo elective pregnancy termination and the need for postprocedural RhD immunoglobulin (RhIG) was posed. Given that only the G antigen site is changed in an RHD*39 genotype and the potential risk of RhIG triggering a hyperhemolytic episode in an SCD patient, RhIG was not administered. There were no procedural complications. Follow-up testing at 10 weeks showed no increase in RBC alloantibody strength.Discussion/ConclusionMs. S represents a rare RHD*39 and partial RHCE*ceVS.02 genotype which did not further alloimmunize in the absence of RhIG administration. Her case also highlights the importance of routine anti-G alloantibody testing in women of childbearing age with apparent anti-D and anti-C alloantibodies.     

The frequency of anti-C + anti-G in the absence of anti-D in alloimmunized pregnancies

Anti-D+C are often initially identified in sera from alloimmunized women. Anti-G may be present in these samples, mimicking anti-D+C, and therefore the differentiation of anti-D, -C and -G may be important. Sera from 27 alloimmunized women, initially identified as containing anti-D + anti-C, were analysed by adsorption/elution studies in the presence of polyethylene glycol (PEG) using R(0)r (D+C-G+) and r'r(D-C+G+) red blood cells (RBC). Additionally, 15/27 samples were tested by adsorption in the presence of PEG and subsequently warm elution, using rGr (D-C-G+) RBC. Anti-G + anti-C, without anti-D, were identified in 4/27 samples (14.8%) and none of the newborn children needed postpartum treatment. The combination of D+G, D+C and D+C+G antibodies occurred in 25.9%, 11.1% and 48.1% of the women, respectively. Overall, anti-G was detected in 24/27 samples (88.9%). Pregnant women shown to have anti-G+C but not anti-D should receive Rh immune globulin. Additionally, the finding of apparent anti-D+C during pregnancy in D-negative spouses may lead to paternity testing and therefore a correct antibody identification is necessary.     

Rh discrepancies caused by variable reactivity of partial and weak D types with different serologic techniques

BACKGROUND: RhD discrepancies between current and historical results are problematic to resolve. The investigation of 10 discrepancies is reported here. STUDY DESIGN: Samples identified were those that reacted by automated gel technology and were negative with an FDA-approved reagent. Reactivity with a commercially available panel of monoclonal anti-D was performed. Genomic DNA was evaluated for RHD alleles with multiplex RHD exon polymerase chain reaction (PCR), weak D PCR-restriction fragment length polymorphism, and RHD exon 5 and 7 sequence analyses. RESULTS: The monoclonal anti-D panel identified two samples as DVa, yet possessed the DAR allele. Two weak D Type 1 samples had a similar monoclonal anti-D profile, but only one reacted directly with one of two FDA-approved anti-D. Only two of four weak D Type 2 samples reacted directly with one FDA-approved anti-D, and their D epitope profile differed. CONCLUSIONS: The monoclonal anti-D reagents did not distinguish between partial and weak D Types 1 and 2. Weak D Types 1 and 2 do not show consistent reactivity with FDA-approved reagents and technology. To limit anti-D alloimmunization, it is recommended that samples yielding an immediate-spin tube test cutoff score of not more than 5 (i.e., < or =1+ agglutination) or a score of not more than 8 (i.e., < or =2+ hemagglutination) by gel technology be considered D- for transfusion and Rh immune globulin prophylaxis. That tube test anti-D reagents react poorly with some Weak D Types 1 and 2 red cells is problematic, inasmuch as they should be considered D+ for transfusion and prenatal care. Molecular tests that distinguish common partial and Weak D types provide the solution to resolving D antigen discrepancies.     

One single dose of 200 microg of antenatal RhIG halves the risk of anti-D immunization and hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn in the next pregnancy

BACKGROUND: The objective was the evaluation of the effect of the Dutch national routine antenatal RhIG (anti-D) immunization prevention (RAADP) program comprising one single dose of 200 microg (1000 IU) of RhIG in the 30th week of pregnancy, restricted to women without a living child. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A nationwide historic control study was performed. All newly detected anti-D-immunized para-1 in 1999, 2002, and 2004 were included and classified on the basis of received prophylaxis during the first pregnancy: antenatal and postnatal versus only postnatal RhIG. The numbers of D- parae-1 who delivered a D+ first child before the introduction (control group) or after the introduction (intervention group) of the RAADP were calculated from Vital Birth Statistics (8,700 and 12,000, respectively). RESULTS: Fifty-eight newly detected anti-D immunizations in the first trimester were observed in the control group and 39 in the intervention group, which resulted in a significant reduction of the prevalence of new anti-D immunizations from 0.67 percent (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.50%-0.84%) to 0.31 percent (95% CI, 0.21%-0.41%). No reduction was observed in anti-D immunizations newly detected at the 30th-week screening (0.25%). A nonsignificant risk reduction of the risk of severe hemolytic disease of the fetus and newborn (HDFN) was found (0.23% vs. 0.10%). The numbers needed to treat to prevent one anti-D-immunized pregnancy and one case of subsequent severe HDFN were 357 and 1255, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RAADP of one single dose of 200 microg of RhIG in addition to postnatal RhIG (200 microg) halves the risk of anti-D immunization and subsequent severe HDFN.     

Monoclonal anti-D specificity and Rh D structure: criteria for selection of monoclonal anti-D reagents for routine typing of patients and donors

SUMMARY. The Rh blood group system is the next most important to the ABO system in terms of its clinical significance in blood transfusion. It is vital to the safe, efficient practice of transfusion medicine that Rh D phenotyping tests are selected, executed and interpreted correctly. However, the Rh D blood group antigen has been shown to be subject to many phenotypic variations, and different reagents and typing techniques vary in their ability to detect these variants. The range of D-positive phenotypes are reviewed in terms of their reactivity with monoclonal antibody reagents and their clinical significance. In view of the available evidence, it is suggested that patient typing can be safely achieved by the duplicate use of one high-avidity or two very similar IgM monoclonal anti-D reagents that detect most variants except category D^VI in simple tube or microplate saline tests. Antiglobulin testing for weak D should not be carried out on patient samples. Donor typing can be safely achieved by the use of the same monoclonal, used in parallel with a polyclonal anti-D reagent that detects D^VI on sensitive automated equipment.     

The treatment of autoimmune thrombocytopaenic purpura with anti-D immunoglobulin: similar platelet responses in homozygous and heterozygous Rh(D) positive patients

Summary. Twenty-one patients with autoimmune thrombocytopaenic purpura (AITP) were treated with anti-D immunoglobulin. There was no significant difference with low and high dose anti-D treatment in the platelet count response between homozygous and heterozygous Rh(D) positive patients. The heterogeneous responses seen in Rh(D) positive AITP patients treated with anti-D immunoglobulin cannot therefore be explained by differences in Rh(D) phenotypes.