Comparison of various canine blood-typing methods
Objective
To compare canine blood-typing results determined by use of the card (CARD), gel (GEL), Michigan State University (MSU), and tube (TUBE) tests.
Sample Population
Blood samples from 23 healthy dogs.
Procedures
Blood samples anticoagulated with EDTA were screened by use of each blood-typing method according to manufacturers' protocols.
Results
Strong RBC agglutination reactions were observed with dog erythrocyte antigen (DEA) 1.1 reagents of the CARD and GEL tests as well as MSU test (only after adding Coombs' reagent) in 9 blood samples. By use of the CARD test, RBCs from 4 additional dogs agglutinated weakly; on the basis of MSU test results, these 4 dogs were classified as DEA 1.2 positive. All blood samples agglutinated with the B antigen reagent of the TUBE test. All but 2 blood samples had strong positive reactions with the DEA 4 reagent of the MSU test. All but 3 blood samples reacted with the E antigen reagent of the TUBE test. Three blood samples agglutinated with the DEA 3 reagent of the MSU test and A antigen reagent of the TUBE test. Five blood samples had strong agglutination reactions with the DEA 5 reagent of the MSU test.
Conclusions and Clinical Relevance
Use of the CARD test allows for rapid identification of DEA 1.1 but may produce weak reactions with blood from DEA 1.2-positive dogs. The GEL test is a reliable and rapid clinical laboratory method for identification of DEA 1.1. The MSU test requires Coombs' reagent for identification of DEA 1.1 and 1.2. (Am J Vet Res 2005;66:1386–1392)
Authors: Urs Giger, Knut Stieger, Hanna Palos
Source: https://avmajournals.avma.org/
Comments
Related Articles
Copyright © 2026 - All Rights Reserved
ISSN 2768-198X
List
Add
Please enter a comment