标准红细胞抗原配型与扩展红细胞抗原配型在预防胎儿和新生儿溶血病方面的比较:系统回顾。

IF 5.7 2区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Obstetrics and gynecology Pub Date : 2024-08-08 DOI:10.1097/AOG.0000000000005701
Ronan P Sugrue, Jaxon Olsen, Marie Elise Abi Antoun, Lesley A Skalla, Jennifer Cate, Andra H James, Alexandra Stonehill, Virginia Watkins, Marilyn J Telen, Jerome J Federspiel
{"title":"标准红细胞抗原配型与扩展红细胞抗原配型在预防胎儿和新生儿溶血病方面的比较:系统回顾。","authors":"Ronan P Sugrue, Jaxon Olsen, Marie Elise Abi Antoun, Lesley A Skalla, Jennifer Cate, Andra H James, Alexandra Stonehill, Virginia Watkins, Marilyn J Telen, Jerome J Federspiel","doi":"10.1097/AOG.0000000000005701","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review and meta-analyze alloimmunization among recipients of red blood cells (RBCs) matched for ABO blood type and Rhesus D (ABO+D) antigen compared with those also matched for c, E, and Kell (cEK).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Four online databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from March 28, 2023, to April 1, 2024. The search protocol was peer reviewed and published on PROSPERO (CRD42023411620).</p><p><strong>Methods of study selection: </strong>Studies reporting alloimmunization as the primary outcome among recipients of RBCs matched for ABO+D or additional cEK matching were included. Patients transfused with unmatched RBCs or a mixture of matching regimens were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies and Tool for Risk of Bias. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to combine effect estimates.</p><p><strong>Tabulation, integration, and results: </strong>Ten studies met criteria. Risk of bias was low. Overall, 91,221 patients were transfused, of whom 40,220 (44.1%) received additional cEK-matched RBCs. The overall rate of alloimmunization was 6.2% (95% CI, 2.5-14.9%) for ABO+D-only matching and 1.9% (95% CI, 0.7-5.1%) when cEK was added. Time of follow-up antibody testing ranged from 6 to 18 months after transfusion. Additional cEK match was associated with significantly less alloimmunization compared with standard ABO+D match (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% CI, 0.20-0.69). This association remained when chronically transfused patients were excluded (OR 0.65, 95% CI, 0.54-0.79) and for alloimmunization to c, E, or K antigens only (OR 0.29, 95% CI, 0.18-0.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Additional cEK RBC matching protocols were associated with lower odds of recipient alloimmunization. Given severe sequelae of alloimmunization in pregnancy, routine cEK matching for transfusion in people with pregnancy potential younger than age 50 years in the United States merits consideration.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO, CRD42023411620.</p>","PeriodicalId":19483,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and gynecology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Standard Compared With Extended Red Blood Cell Antigen Matching for Prevention of Subsequent Hemolytic Disease of the Fetus and Newborn: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Ronan P Sugrue, Jaxon Olsen, Marie Elise Abi Antoun, Lesley A Skalla, Jennifer Cate, Andra H James, Alexandra Stonehill, Virginia Watkins, Marilyn J Telen, Jerome J Federspiel\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/AOG.0000000000005701\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically review and meta-analyze alloimmunization among recipients of red blood cells (RBCs) matched for ABO blood type and Rhesus D (ABO+D) antigen compared with those also matched for c, E, and Kell (cEK).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Four online databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from March 28, 2023, to April 1, 2024. The search protocol was peer reviewed and published on PROSPERO (CRD42023411620).</p><p><strong>Methods of study selection: </strong>Studies reporting alloimmunization as the primary outcome among recipients of RBCs matched for ABO+D or additional cEK matching were included. Patients transfused with unmatched RBCs or a mixture of matching regimens were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies and Tool for Risk of Bias. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to combine effect estimates.</p><p><strong>Tabulation, integration, and results: </strong>Ten studies met criteria. Risk of bias was low. Overall, 91,221 patients were transfused, of whom 40,220 (44.1%) received additional cEK-matched RBCs. The overall rate of alloimmunization was 6.2% (95% CI, 2.5-14.9%) for ABO+D-only matching and 1.9% (95% CI, 0.7-5.1%) when cEK was added. Time of follow-up antibody testing ranged from 6 to 18 months after transfusion. Additional cEK match was associated with significantly less alloimmunization compared with standard ABO+D match (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% CI, 0.20-0.69). This association remained when chronically transfused patients were excluded (OR 0.65, 95% CI, 0.54-0.79) and for alloimmunization to c, E, or K antigens only (OR 0.29, 95% CI, 0.18-0.47).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Additional cEK RBC matching protocols were associated with lower odds of recipient alloimmunization. Given severe sequelae of alloimmunization in pregnancy, routine cEK matching for transfusion in people with pregnancy potential younger than age 50 years in the United States merits consideration.</p><p><strong>Systematic review registration: </strong>PROSPERO, CRD42023411620.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19483,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obstetrics and gynecology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obstetrics and gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005701\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000005701","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的系统回顾和荟萃分析ABO血型和恒河猴D(ABO+D)抗原匹配的红细胞(RBC)与c、E和Kell(cEK)匹配的红细胞(RBC)接受者之间的同种免疫情况:从 2023 年 3 月 28 日至 2024 年 4 月 1 日检索了四个在线数据库(Medline、Scopus、EMBASE、ClinicalTrials.gov)。检索协议经同行评审后发布在 PROSPERO (CRD42023411620)上:纳入的研究报告将同种异体免疫作为 ABO+D 或额外 cEK 匹配的 RBC 受体的主要结果。排除了输注未配型RBC或混合配型方案的患者。使用科克伦队列研究偏倚风险评估工具(Cochrane Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies)和偏倚风险工具(Tool for Risk of Bias)评估偏倚风险。随机效应荟萃分析用于合并效应估计值:十项研究符合标准。偏倚风险较低。共有 91,221 名患者接受了输血,其中 40,220 人(44.1%)接受了额外的 cEK 匹配红细胞。仅 ABO+D 配型的总异体免疫率为 6.2% (95% CI, 2.5-14.9%),加入 cEK 后为 1.9% (95% CI, 0.7-5.1%)。抗体检测的随访时间从输血后 6 个月到 18 个月不等。与标准的 ABO+D 配型相比,额外的 cEK 配型可显著降低同种异体免疫(几率比 [OR] 0.37,95% CI,0.20-0.69)。如果排除长期输血的患者(OR 0.65,95% CI,0.54-0.79)以及仅对 c、E 或 K 抗原的同种异体免疫(OR 0.29,95% CI,0.18-0.47),这种关联性依然存在:结论:额外的 cEK 红细胞匹配方案与受体发生同种异体免疫的几率较低有关。考虑到妊娠期同种免疫的严重后遗症,美国值得考虑对 50 岁以下有妊娠可能的人群输血时进行常规 cEK 配型:prospero,CRD42023411620。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Standard Compared With Extended Red Blood Cell Antigen Matching for Prevention of Subsequent Hemolytic Disease of the Fetus and Newborn: A Systematic Review.

Objective: To systematically review and meta-analyze alloimmunization among recipients of red blood cells (RBCs) matched for ABO blood type and Rhesus D (ABO+D) antigen compared with those also matched for c, E, and Kell (cEK).

Data sources: Four online databases (Medline, Scopus, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from March 28, 2023, to April 1, 2024. The search protocol was peer reviewed and published on PROSPERO (CRD42023411620).

Methods of study selection: Studies reporting alloimmunization as the primary outcome among recipients of RBCs matched for ABO+D or additional cEK matching were included. Patients transfused with unmatched RBCs or a mixture of matching regimens were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane Tool to Assess Risk of Bias in Cohort Studies and Tool for Risk of Bias. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to combine effect estimates.

Tabulation, integration, and results: Ten studies met criteria. Risk of bias was low. Overall, 91,221 patients were transfused, of whom 40,220 (44.1%) received additional cEK-matched RBCs. The overall rate of alloimmunization was 6.2% (95% CI, 2.5-14.9%) for ABO+D-only matching and 1.9% (95% CI, 0.7-5.1%) when cEK was added. Time of follow-up antibody testing ranged from 6 to 18 months after transfusion. Additional cEK match was associated with significantly less alloimmunization compared with standard ABO+D match (odds ratio [OR] 0.37, 95% CI, 0.20-0.69). This association remained when chronically transfused patients were excluded (OR 0.65, 95% CI, 0.54-0.79) and for alloimmunization to c, E, or K antigens only (OR 0.29, 95% CI, 0.18-0.47).

Conclusion: Additional cEK RBC matching protocols were associated with lower odds of recipient alloimmunization. Given severe sequelae of alloimmunization in pregnancy, routine cEK matching for transfusion in people with pregnancy potential younger than age 50 years in the United States merits consideration.

Systematic review registration: PROSPERO, CRD42023411620.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Obstetrics and gynecology
Obstetrics and gynecology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
11.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
867
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: "Obstetrics & Gynecology," affectionately known as "The Green Journal," is the official publication of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). Since its inception in 1953, the journal has been dedicated to advancing the clinical practice of obstetrics and gynecology, as well as related fields. The journal's mission is to promote excellence in these areas by publishing a diverse range of articles that cover translational and clinical topics. "Obstetrics & Gynecology" provides a platform for the dissemination of evidence-based research, clinical guidelines, and expert opinions that are essential for the continuous improvement of women's health care. The journal's content is designed to inform and educate obstetricians, gynecologists, and other healthcare professionals, ensuring that they stay abreast of the latest developments and best practices in their field.
期刊最新文献
False-Positive Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Test Results With Rapid Seroreversion After Third-Trimester Tdap Booster Vaccination. Compliance Rate With Triage Test and Treatment for Participants Screening Positive in Cervical Cancer Screening Programs: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Effects of Antihypertensive Therapy During Pregnancy on Postpartum Blood Pressure Control. Management of Vulvovaginal Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis. Navigating the Legal Landscape of Reproductive Rights and Medical Training After LePage v. Mobile Infirmary Clinic.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1