These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

131 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21897596)

  • 1. Safety of type and screen method compared to conventional antiglobulin crossmatch procedures for compatibility testing in Indian setting.
    Chaudhary R; Agarwal N
    Asian J Transfus Sci; 2011 Jul; 5(2):157-9. PubMed ID: 21897596
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. A prospective study to determine the safety of omitting the antiglobulin crossmatch from pretransfusion testing.
    Heddle NM; O'Hoski P; Singer J; McBride JA; Ali MA; Kelton JG
    Br J Haematol; 1992 Aug; 81(4):579-84. PubMed ID: 1390245
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Type and screen method and Coombs crossmatch method for pretransfusion testing: A prospective comparative study in a tertiary care hospital in Delhi.
    Anu KD; Pahuja S; Sharma G
    Asian J Transfus Sci; 2022; 16(1):83-88. PubMed ID: 36199420
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. First Indian study to establish safety of immediate-spin crossmatch for red blood cell transfusion in antibody screen-negative recipients.
    Tiwari AK; Aggarwal G; Dara RC; Arora D; Gupta GK; Raina V
    Asian J Transfus Sci; 2017; 11(1):40-44. PubMed ID: 28316439
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. A multicenter prospective observational study on the use of type and screen method versus conventional type and crossmatch policy for pre-transfusion testing in the Indian population.
    Mathur A; Jindal A; Tiwari AK; Bhuyan D; Jagannathan L; Sawant RB; Basu S; Reddy M; Datta SS
    Immunohematology; 2022 Sep; 38(3):100-105. PubMed ID: 36190198
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Safety and cost-containment data that advocate abbreviated pretransfusion testing.
    Cordle DG; Strauss RG; Snyder EL; Floss AM
    Am J Clin Pathol; 1990 Oct; 94(4):428-31. PubMed ID: 2220670
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Pre- and Post-Transfusion Alloimmunization in Dogs Characterized by 2 Antiglobulin-Enhanced Cross-match Tests.
    Goy-Thollot I; Giger U; Boisvineau C; Perrin R; Guidetti M; Chaprier B; Barthélemy A; Pouzot-Nevoret C; Canard B
    J Vet Intern Med; 2017 Sep; 31(5):1420-1429. PubMed ID: 28804957
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Comparison of a manual hexadimethrine bromide-antiglobulin test with saline- and albumin-antiglobulin tests for pretransfusion testing.
    Mintz PD; Anderson G
    Transfusion; 1987; 27(2):134-7. PubMed ID: 3824470
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. A reappraisal of pre-transfusion testing procedures in a hospital blood bank.
    Lown JA; Barr AL; Jackson JM
    Pathology; 1985 Jul; 17(3):489-92. PubMed ID: 4069768
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Pretransfusion blood group serology. Limited value of the antiglobulin phase of the crossmatch when a careful screening test for unexpected antibodies is performed.
    Heistø H
    Transfusion; 1979; 19(6):761-3. PubMed ID: 118557
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Frequency of delayed hemolytic transfusion reactions following antibody screening and immediate-spin crossmatching.
    Pinkerton PH; Coovadia AS; Goldstein J
    Transfusion; 1992; 32(9):814-7. PubMed ID: 1471244
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Is the indirect antiglobulin crossmatch justified?
    Peterson DM; Roxby DJ; Seshadri R
    Pathology; 1987 Apr; 19(2):121-3. PubMed ID: 3502613
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Acute Hemolytic Transfusion Reaction Caused by a Red Cell Antibody That Was Missed by Pretransfusion Testing Using Tube Method.
    Shmookler A; Hamad D; Scrape S; Chen J
    Lab Med; 2017 Aug; 48(3):258-261. PubMed ID: 28934518
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Indirect antiglobulin test-crossmatch using low-ionic-strength saline-albumin enhancement medium and reduced incubation time: effectiveness in the detection of most clinically significant antibodies and impact on blood utilization.
    Dinardo CL; Bonifácio SL; Mendrone A
    Immunohematology; 2014; 30(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 25238242
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Is It Time to Switch from Conventional Coombs Crossmatching to the Type and Screen Protocol?
    Baiju NM; Rafi AM; Henry N; Bhaskaran R; Innah SJ; Sasidharan A
    Malays J Med Sci; 2023 Apr; 30(2):124-130. PubMed ID: 37102041
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Advantages of type and screen policy: Perspective from a developing country!
    Aggarwal G; Tiwari AK; Arora D; Dara RC; Acharya DP; Bhardwaj G; Sharma J
    Asian J Transfus Sci; 2018; 12(1):42-45. PubMed ID: 29563674
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Type and screen policy in the blood bank: Is AHG cross-match still required? A study at a multispecialty corporate hospital in India.
    Pathak S; Chandrashekhar M; Wankhede GR
    Asian J Transfus Sci; 2011 Jul; 5(2):153-6. PubMed ID: 21897595
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. A proposal for compatibility testing incorporating the manual hexadimethrine bromide (Polybrene) test.
    Steane EA; Steane SM; Montgomery SR; Pearson JR
    Transfusion; 1985; 25(6):540-4. PubMed ID: 4071598
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Prevalence of clinically significant antibodies in patients undergoing elective surgery in a Nigerian teaching hospital: A case for the type and screen method.
    Obi EI; Pughikumo OC; Korubo KI; Ejele AO
    Niger J Clin Pract; 2020 Feb; 23(2):138-146. PubMed ID: 32031086
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20.
    ; ; . PubMed ID:
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.