Literature DB >> 31515937

Out with the old, in with the new: Virtual versus physical crossmatching in the modern era.

Anna B Morris1, H C Sullivan2, Scott M Krummey2, Howard M Gebel2, Robert A Bray2.   

Abstract

The virtual crossmatch (VXM) is gaining acceptance as an alternative approach to assess donor:recipient compatibility prior to transplantation. In contrast to a physical crossmatch, the virtual crossmatch does not require viable donor cells but rather relies on complete HLA typing of the donor and current antibody assessment of the recipient. Thus, the VXM can be performed in minutes which allows for faster transplant decisions thereby increasing the likelihood that organs can be shipped across significant distances yet safely transplanted. Here, we present a brief review of the past 50 years of histocompatibility testing; from the original complement-dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch in 1969 to the new era of molecular HLA typing, solid-phase antibody testing and virtual crossmatching. These advancements have shaped a paradigm shift in our approach to transplantation. That is, foregoing a prospective physical crossmatch in favor of a VXM. In this review, we undertake an in-depth analysis of the pros- and cons- of physical and virtual crossmatching.Finally, we provide objective data on the selected use of the VXM which demonstrate the value of a VXM in lieu of the traditional physical crossmatch for safe and efficient organ transplantation.
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  HLA antibody; crossmatch; histocompatibility; single antigen bead; virtual crossmatch

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31515937     DOI: 10.1111/tan.13693

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  HLA        ISSN: 2059-2302            Impact factor:   4.513


  7 in total

1.  Virtual Crossmatching in Kidney Transplantation, Shiraz Experience in Development of a Web-Based Program.

Authors:  N Jamshidian Tehrani; B Geramizadeh; S A Malekhosseini; S Nikeghbalian; A Bahador; S Gholami; G A Raees Jalali; J Roozbeh; M H Anbardar; N Soleimani; N Rasaei; S Mohammadzadeh
Journal:  Int J Organ Transplant Med       Date:  2021

Review 2.  Immunological considerations-HLA matching and management of high immunological risk recipients.

Authors:  Olga Timofeeva; James Brown
Journal:  Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2021-07-29

Review 3.  BSHI/BTS guidance on crossmatching before deceased donor kidney transplantation.

Authors:  S Peacock; D Briggs; M Barnardo; R Battle; P Brookes; C Callaghan; B Clark; C Collins; S Day; N Diaz Burlinson; P Dunn; R Fernando; S Fuggle; A Harmer; D Kallon; D Keegan; T Key; E Lawson; S Lloyd; J Martin; J McCaughan; D Middleton; F Partheniou; A Poles; T Rees; D Sage; E Santos-Nunez; O Shaw; M Willicombe; J Worthington
Journal:  Int J Immunogenet       Date:  2021-09-23       Impact factor: 2.385

Review 4.  Principles of Virtual Crossmatch Testing for Kidney Transplantation.

Authors:  Madhu C Bhaskaran; Sebastiaan Heidt; Thangamani Muthukumar
Journal:  Kidney Int Rep       Date:  2022-03-15

5.  Autologous cell replacement: a noninvasive AI approach to clinical release testing.

Authors:  Budd A Tucker; Robert F Mullins; Edwin M Stone
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 14.808

6.  Trends and impact on cold ischemia time and clinical outcomes using virtual crossmatch for deceased donor kidney transplantation in the United States.

Authors:  Chethan M Puttarajappa; Dana Jorgensen; Jonathan G Yabes; Kwonho Jeong; Adriana Zeevi; John Lunz; Amit D Tevar; Michele Molinari; Sumit Mohan; Sundaram Hariharan
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2021-04-30       Impact factor: 18.998

7.  The causes and frequency of kidney allograft failure in a low-resource setting: observational data from Iraqi Kurdistan.

Authors:  Alaa Abbas Ali; Safaa E Almukhtar; Kais H Abd; Zana Sidiq M Saleem; Dana A Sharif; Michael D Hughson
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2021-08-07       Impact factor: 2.388

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.