Discrepancies between red cell phenotyping and genotyping in daily immunohematology laboratory practice

• Published in: Transfusion and apheresis science 2020-02, Vol.59 (1), p.102585-102585, Article 102585
• Main Authors: Menegati, Sheila F.P., Santos, Tamires D., Macedo, Mayra D., Castilho, Lilian
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Genotype; Health technology assessment; Hemagglutination; Molecular methods; Phenotype
• ISSN: 1473-0502
• DOI: 10.1016/j.transci.2019.06.020

False-positive and false-negative reactions exist for serological and molecular antigen typing methods. If the predicted phenotype is inconsistent with the patient`s known antibodies or serological phenotype, the discrepancy must be investigated. False-negative and false-positive results are clinically problematic in blood donors and patients. In this study, we investigated discrepant results between serology and molecular testing in patients and blood donors that occurred in daily molecular laboratory practice over a two year-period. SCD patients represented a large percentage of our cases of discrepancies but we also observed a high prevalence of discrepancies between phenotypes and genotypes in blood donors. The main reasons that led to discrepancies were recent transfusions and limitations of phenotyping. Discrepancies classified as false positive phenotype/true negative genotype and false negative phenotype/true positive genotype occurred mainly in patients with recent transfusions and individuals with RH variants while those classified as true negative phenotype/false positive genotype involved null phenotypes due to silent genes. Despite the limitations of molecular methods currently employed, we found more false-negative and false-positive phenotypes than genotypes demonstrating that genotyping is more efficient to define the blood types, especially in transfusion dependent patients.