


Donor ABO/D typing, antibody screening, antibody identification, ABO antibody titration



Note: This is an updated version of a previous post.
Principle:
Washing RBCs removes plasma and reduces the leukocyte count only by 1 log. For leukodepletion, we must rely on filtration to reduce the WBCs to less than 1 x 106 per unit according to CE rules. Red cells or platelets in additive solution contain only minimal plasma (about 35 ml). There are few definite indications for washing RBCs and it should be rarely necessary.
Policy:
Washing RBCs should only be done in the following circumstances:
Note:
Reference:
Standards for Blood Banks and Transfusion Services, Current Edition, AABB, Bethesda, MD, USA
Principle:
For the purpose of typing blood donors, we want to detect weak and partial D types and consider them as D-positive since even a portion of the D molecule is immunogenic and sensitization to it may cause anti-D hemolytic disease of the newborn.
Background:
Ortho Diagnostics Reagents use three different monoclonal antibody cocktails that react variably with the antigen D (Rh1)—these are found on TWO (2) cards: Anti-A/B/A,B/D/CDE and Anti-DVI:
Anti-D/Anti-RH1—IgM monoclonal antibody clone D7B8 can detect most examples of weak and partial D including weak D types 1, 2, 3, 4.0, and D categories II, III, IV, V, VII, DBT, and R0Har. It does NOT detect category VI. Retest positive reactions of 2+ or less by an alternate method. It may show different serologic activity compared to other D typing reagents.
Anti-CDE/Anti-RH1,2,3—IgM monoclonal blend of clone MS24 (anti-C), clone MAD2 (Anti-D), and clone C2 (Anti-E) can detect most cells expressing C, D, or E antigens. Most examples of partial D including DVI and weak D express C or E antigens and will be detected directly by the included anti-D or indirectly by the anti-C or anti-E in the cocktail. It does NOT detect Rh:33 (R0Har).
Anti-DVI/Anti-RH1 will agglutinate cells with a DVI phenotype, analogous to our previous DVI+ reagents.
Policy:
| Pattern # | Anti-D/D7B8 | Anti-CDE | Anti-DVI | D-Interpretation |
| 1 | Positive | Positive | Positive | D-positive |
| 2 | Positive | Positive | Negative | Do additional testing |
| 3 | Positive | Negative | Negative | Do additional testing |
| 4 | Negative | Negative | Positive | Do additional testing |
| 5 | Positive | Negative | Positive | Do additional testing |
| 6 | Negative | Positive | Positive | D-positive, probable DVI variant |
| 7 | Negative | Positive | Negative | D-negative, probable rare genotypes r’ and/or r’’ |
| 8 | Negative | Negative | Negative | D-Negative |
If the reaction is 2+ or less with the Ortho anti-D/D7B8 reagent or 1+ with either the CDE or DVI reagents is patterns 2, 3, 4, or 5 above, repeat by another manufacturer’s reagents, including DVI+ and DVI- sensitivities.
Medinfo-Ortho interface settings for Blood Donor Center:
| Anti-D/D7B8 | Anti-CDE | D-Interpretation |
| 3,4 | 1,2,3,4 | D-positive |
| 3,4 | 0 | Indeterminate |
| 0 | 0 | Indeterminate |
| 0 | 1,2,3,4 | Do DVI REFLEX |
| REFLEX DVI | If DVI-pos, then D-positive | |
| REFLEX DVI | If DVI-neg, then D-negative | |
| 0 | 0 | D-negative |
| ~ | ~ | Indeterminate |
~ means any other result
Note all of the following:
References:
These are my specifications used in April, 2020 at HMC Qatar for setting up the CCP processes in Medinfo Hematos IIG:


In my recent post, I provided sample flows and parameter mapping for delivery of blood components. The final components from the component preparation center may be sent to various depots (freestanding location and/or hospital blood banks. There should be complete traceability for every step (from donor reception, collection, testing, and processing) transport between locations, and finally the exact storage site, which might include which refrigerator/freezer/incubator and even shelf/position number for each component is stored. The end of that document showed rules for type/antigen matching.
For disaster planning, rapid inventory enumeration by type is very important. This can be very time-consuming manually. With our Medinfo Hematos blood bank system, we could quickly get total inventory across the Qatar or by hospital in less than one minute. We could also quickly find antigen-matched units across the system and reserve it at any one site for another if necessary.
Smart blood bank dispensing refrigerators, as offered by Haemonetics and Angelatoni, may also serve as depots and take the place of a hospital blood bank for some dispensing. These solutions can also capture vital information about the storage conditions of the components and prevent release if the storage criteria are not met. They can also interface with blood bank computer systems and use the main system’s logic for the dispensation rules. In Medinfo, they can be added as a hospital blood bank site.
Upon receipt at the hospitals from the blood processing center, the forward ABO and D typing must be confirmed. We used D reagents which detected partial D so we would call such donor units as D-positive. However, if a patient type reagent insensitive to partial D types is used, it is possible for a unit to be typed as D-negative whereas in the donor center it might be D-positive. Sometimes, nothing types consistently as D-positive: all you can say is that with a particular reagent and lot number, there is or isn’t reactivity.
The greatest complexity is for RBCs since potentially so many antigens exist. Criteria for matching/ignoring certain antigens must be made. Critically significant antibodies such as the Kell, Duffy, Kidd, and certain Rh (D and c) must be antigen matched. A robust blood bank computer system can enforce these rules.
For other components, antigen/typing may be less important. In fact, in most situations, any type of platelets can be given to anyone (except neonates). Despite the potentially incompatible plasma, there is rarely significant hemolysis. In fact, if pooling platelets without regard to blood types is done, a platelet transfusion is a common cause of a positive direct antiglobulin test DAT—something that is not clinically significant. No one died of a positive DAT by itself for this reason.
Specific rules for compatible plasma types are important, but nowadays, low-titer group A plasma may be used like universal AB plasma. The challenge is to be able to perform the ABO titration (specifically anti-B) quickly—titration can be a slow process, even with automated equipment. A similar situation for low-titer, universal group O whole blood requires both anti-A and anti-B titration (I will return to this topic in a future post). With Medinfo, I can define rules (e.g. IgM titer < 1:64) to accept these units as a universal type for all ABO groups.
Special rules can be built into the software so that production, transfer, storage, and release of COVID convalescent plasma CCP are only performed at special quarantine sites by designated personnel. This means there can be dedicated transport pathways built into the inter-depot transfer process to keep this inventory separate at all times.
I prepared the following plan for a CCP program for HMC Qatar in March, 2020. The workflow is divided into four (4) modules:
Module 1:
Module 2:
Module 3:
Module 4:
Workflow Considerations:
Logistics:
Information Technology:
When I first moved overseas from the United States, I brought the perspective of my American training and experience. I saw everything in my new blood bank through those eyes.
Yet, most of my staff were not American or even North American. Few were even native in English, and most of those were not American. They had different qualifications, many of which would not have been accepted by the American schemes. Still, they functioned well.
I also worked with the US military technologist staff during Gulf War One. Some did not even have a Bachelor’s degree; yet, they performed the work well.
I used many technologies that were not yet (or never) US FDA approved such as gel or glass bead typings and pooled buffy coat platelet production. There were rare reagents I could buy off the shelf (e.g. anti-Tja/PP1Pk).
Later, I adopted pathogen-reduction technology (Mirasol), automated component production (Atreus then Reveos), and platelet additive solution. I achieve a level of good manufacturing practice that would have been difficult to achieve by the FDA-approved methods.
My perspective had changed. In the Middle East, I studied many frameworks and came to the conclusion that the best approach was to customize them to our local needs. My particular experience was to start with one framework, i.e. Council of Europe CE, and then localize it.
To do this, I could not use an American turnkey blood bank software for either the donor or patient operations. I needed a flexible system that could be customized to my needs. Again, I chose a CE-marked system, Medinfo Hematos IIG that had already been adapted to many frameworks.
It is much easier to work solely within one system such as FDA. However, if I had done that, I would have lost so much flexibility and not had a system optimized for local conditions. I would not have used Mirasol, Reveos, Diamed, and many other reagents.
One big disappointment at such international meetings is the perspective by one country’s regulatory agency that they feel its regulations and framework will work well overseas. I would wager that those people were not well acquainted with international conditions.
Another frustration was attending another international meeting in which the presenters apologized for the source of information since it came from a foreign country (France) and not their own (United States).
No country has a monopoly on what is best for everyone. To share our experiences and compare is so valuable. No one assume his way is the best. In my career, I have had the richest experiences studying other perspectives and my organizations have benefited greatly from the exchange. We can all learn from each other. We are citizens of the world.
It now has been over eight 8 months since I prepared the CCP workflow in Medinfo. It was built on the framework of the manual CCP process including donor prescreening with an abbreviated donor questionnaire. It was really quite simple and used the donor and patient modules to create quarantine areas for donor screening, collection, processing, and hospital patient blood bank release.
Here are my current comments on the process:
Donor Qualification:
I would still exclude malaria and HTLV from the donor questionnaire and would update to UDQ 2.1. Since these donors have recovered from a potentially life-threatening illness, I would keep the Hgb threshold at 11 g/dl.
Donor Collection:
In the future, I would consider using one of the soon-to-be-released portable devices that continuously monitor vital signs with pO2 and EKG lead to rule out asymptomatic pulmonary or cardiac problems.
I would also consider using low-ABO-titer, group A, universally to meet the demand for group B and AB patients.
Donor Testing:
There is still no need to segregate and separately test CCP donor specimens from regular blood donor specimens. I would perform SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing and set a threshold for qualifying donors—that threshold will be based on the manufacturer’s recommendations. However, if the treating physician wanted to use a low-titer unit, I would permit this.
Donor Processing:
There is no need to change this from the current processes. Keep the CCP processing separate from the regular operations.
CCP Plasma Release:
I would keep the quarantine release and restrict it to the locations used for treating COVID-19 patients
Medinfo Software Modifications:
I would record the IgG and IgM titers for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in each donation record. This would include testing and entering the results on donations prior to this testing. ISBT labels should include this antibody titer.
Hospital Information Software Modifications:
Set up restricted CCP ordering for the actual treating physicians only. Also provide the ISBT code and shortened descriptors to it if necessary (certain HIS vendors still cannot read ISBT codes natively).
The original CCP workflow is attached for reference.

This process was originally done in the first phase of CCP collection. I have updated it to include SARS-CoV-2 antibody testing.
Principle:
Due to the pandemic, we will initially MANUALLY collect an experimental, investigational-use-only plasma product from apheresis donors and treat it with Mirasol. THIS IS A EMERGENCY INTERIM PROCESS UNTIL THE MEDINFO HEMATOS IIG PROCESSES ARE PREPARED AND VALIDATED.
Policy:
References:
I will be posting a detailed series about the manual and software-enhanced COVID-19 processes that I set up in Qatar at HMC Doha in March-April 2020.
In this series I will provide you with screen shots of my Medinfo Hematos IIG software design for each step in the process: collection, processing, testing, inter-depot transfer, and hospital transfusion service/blood bank release.
This GMP-compliant software-enhanced system is based on the manual system I set up in early March 2020 at HMC.
I want to thank Medinfo Hematos IIG for their rapid response to building this parallel system based on my standard processes in so short a time (two weeks) and my special thanks to the software engineering team at Vital Health Technologies, the agent for Medinfo in Qatar.
To start the series, I am providing the basic workflow for the system. As is normal in Medinfo software design, a full mapping of the processes are made. This workflow shows the new CCP ISBT codes and the quarantine collection and processing steps. The donor testing (marker and immunohematology) processes are similar to those for regular donor units.
This is basically the same process both manually and in the software. I always say:
A good software process is based on a good manual process!!
Please note the following workflow for our initial discussion.
