Literature DB >> 22310587

Frequent false-positive reactions in pronase-treated T-cell flow cytometric cross-match tests.

H Park1, Y M Lim, B Y Han, J Hyun, E Y Song, M H Park.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Pretransplantation cross-match (XM) is essential in organ transplantation. The flow cytometric XM (FCXM) is the most sensitive cell-based XM technique. Pronase treatment is used to improve the sensitivity and specificity of the B-cell FCXM. Thus, pronase-treated (PT) T cells are tested in a single tube T-cell/B-cell technique. Observing discrepancies between PT and pronase-nontreated (PN) T- FCXM results, we investigated their incidence, clinical significance, and possible causes.
METHODS: We tested 226 serum samples from 167 kidney transplantation candidates or posttransplantation follow-up patients using PT and PN T-FCXM in parallel using 3-color and 2-color immunofluorescence staining, respectively. We reviewed panel-reactive antibody (PRA) and donor-specific antibody (DSA) status as well as HLA data and clinical outcomes.
RESULTS: The T-FCXM positive rate was significantly higher among PT versus PN tests (24.3% vs 11.1%; P < .001). Less than half of the PT-positive cases were positive in the PN test (45.5%; 25/55). Discrepancies were observed in 30 cases (13.3%), all of which gave PT(+)/PN(-) results. Our findings suggested that PT(+)/PN(-) results might arise from non-HLA antibodies. Class I DSA-positive rate (6.3% vs 2.2%; P = .45) and antibody-mediated rejection rate (0% vs 16.3%; P = .32) were not different between PT(+)/PN(-) and PT(-)/PN(-) groups. Moreover, 2 cases of PT(+)/PN(-) were observed among HLA-A, B, DR-identical donor-recipient pairs.
CONCLUSION: Pronase treatment is prone to give false-positive reactions in T-FCXM test probably due to the participation of non-HLA antibodies including autoantibodies. Patients might be inappropriately excluded from receiving organs. In laboratories using PT single tube T/B FCXM, caution is needed to avoid false-positive reporting of results.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22310587     DOI: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2011.12.048

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transplant Proc        ISSN: 0041-1345            Impact factor:   1.066


  4 in total

1.  Virtual HLA Crossmatching as a Means to Safely Expedite Transplantation of Imported Pancreata.

Authors:  Brian C Eby; Robert R Redfield; Thomas M Ellis; Glen E Leverson; Abby R Schenian; Jon S Odorico
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 4.939

2.  Causes of Positive Pretransplant Crossmatches in the Absence of Donor-Specific Anti-Human Leukocyte Antigen Antibodies: A Single-Center Experience.

Authors:  Hyunhye Kang; Jaeeun Yoo; Sang-Yoon Lee; Eun-Jee Oh
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2021-07-01       Impact factor: 3.464

3.  Technical and clinical aspects of the histocompatibility crossmatch assay in solid organ transplantation

Authors:  Ana María Arrunátegui; Daniel S Ramón; Luz Marina Viola; Linda G Olsen; Andrés Jaramillo
Journal:  Biomedica       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 1.173

Review 4.  Paraffin Immunofluorescence: A Valuable Ancillary Technique in Renal Pathology.

Authors:  Samih H Nasr; Mary E Fidler; Samar M Said
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2018-07-07
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.