Vetnews | Augustus 2024 10 « BACK TO CONTENTS 2.4 Statistical analysis Nonparametric statistical tests were employed due to the ordinal nature of the dependent variables (eg, hemolysis and agglutination grading). The occurrence of hemolysis and agglutination for rabbit recipients was compared between donor species using a Kruskal–Wallis test, followed by pairwise comparisons using a Wilcoxon ranksum test. Differences in the occurrence of hemolysis and agglutination for rabbit recipients between feline and canine blood types were compared using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. The occurrence of hemolysis and agglutination pre- and postincubation at 370C for 30 minutes was also compared using a Wilcoxon rank-sum test. If applicable, the relative risk of hemolysis and agglutination between canine and feline blood donors and types was calculated. For all statistical tests, null hypotheses were rejected when P-values were <0.05. All calculations and analyses were performed in the statistical software Rf using the “dplyr,” “tidyr,” and “epitools” packages and their dependents. 3. RESULTS A total of 77 major crossmatches were performed. All internal quality controls (ie, self-crossmatches) were negative for hemolysis and macroscopic and microscopic agglutination (Table 1). All major crossmatches between rabbit recipients and canine and feline blood donors were negative for hemolysis but produced varying degrees of macroscopic and microscopic agglutination (Table 1). For DEA-1-negative and DEA-1-postive donors, 100% (11/11) of rabbit recipients had 1+ macroscopic agglutination post-incubation at 370C for 30 minutes. For feline type A donors, 36% (4/11) of rabbit recipients had weak positive macroscopic agglutination, 55% (6/11) had 1+ macroscopic agglutination, and 9% (1/11) had microscopic agglutination post-incubation at 370C for 30 minutes. For feline type B donors, 9% (1/11)of rabbit recipients had weak positive macroscopic agglutination,45.5% (5/11) had 1+ macroscopic agglutination, and 45.5% (5/11) had microscopic agglutination postincubation at 370C for 30 minutes. All major crossmatches between rabbit recipients and donor conspecifics were negative for hemolysis and macroscopic and microscopic agglutination (Table 1). A Kruskal–Wallis test found a significant difference in the occurrence of agglutination between donor species (P < 0.001). Wilcoxon rank-sum test pairwise comparisons found significant differences in the occurrence of agglutination between canine and rabbit donors (P < 0.001), feline and rabbit donors (P < 0.001), and canine and feline donors (P < 0.001). Major crossmatches with canine and feline donors resulted in significantly higher occurrences of agglutination than rabbit donors (P < 0.001, respectively), and major crossmatches with canine donors resulted in a significantly higher occurrence than feline donors (P < 0.001). Major crossmatches with canine donors had 1.4 (95% confidence interval: 1.1–1.8) times the risk of macroscopic agglutination compared with feline donors. No significant difference in agglutination was found between canine blood types and feline blood types; similarly, no significant difference in agglutination was found pre- and post-incubation across all crossmatches. 4. DISCUSSION If a blood donor rabbit is not readily available, an emergency xenotransfusion with canine or feline blood products to a severely anemic rabbit may be a life-saving alternative. This study is the first to report the major crossmatch compatibility between blood of rabbit recipients, rabbit donors, and the 4major canine and feline blood types. No hemolysis or agglutination in all major crossmatches between rabbit donors and recipients was identified, supporting this study’s first hypothesis and potentially suggesting a high likelihood of in vivo serological compatibility between rabbits. Leading Article Preincubation Postincubation Agglutination Agglutination Blood donor Hemolysis Macroscopi Microscopic Hemolysis Macroscopi Microscopic Self (controls) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Rabbit Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) Absent 0/11 (0%) DEA 1+ Absent 0/11 (0%) W+ 1/11 (9%) N/A Absent 0/11 (0%) 1+ 11/11 (100%) N/A DEA 1− Absent 0/11 (0%) 1+ 11/11 (100%) N/A Absent 0/11 (0%) 1+ 11/11 (100%) N/A Feline type A Absent 0/11 (0%) W+ 5/11 (45%) 1+ 4/11 (37%) Present 2/11 (18%) Absent 0/11 (0%) W+ 4/11 (36%) 1+ 6/11 (55%) Present 1/11 (9%) Feline type B Absent 0/11 (0%) W+ 2/11 (18%) 1+ 4/11 (37%) Present 5/11 (45%) Absent 0/11 (0%) W+ 1/11 (9%) 1+ 5/11 (45.5%) Present 5/11 (45.5%) TABLE 1: The major crossmatch compatibility between rabbit recipients (n = 11), rabbit donors, and canine and feline blood donors of different major blood types: DEA-1-positive, DEA-1-negative, feline type A, and feline type B. Note: Rabbit recipients also served as conspecific rabbit blood donors. Major crossmatches were interpreted pre- and post incubation at 370C for 30 minutes to assess for any delayed hemolysis or agglutination. Hemolysis and microscopic agglutination were graded as present or absent. Macroscopic agglutination was graded on a scale of absent, weak positive (W+), 1+, 2+, 3+, or 4+ as follows: W+ = very small, barely visible agglutination with a turbid background of free RBCs; 1+ = obvious small agglutinates with a turbid background of free RBCs; 2+ = medium-sized agglutinates present with a clear background; 3+=several large agglutinates; 4+=1 solid agglutinate with no free RBC.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTc5MDU=