Comparison of crossmatch results obtained by ELISA, flow cytometry, and conventional methodologies

The complement-dependent lymphocytotoxicity crossmatch (CXM) is the presently accepted standard for detection of donor-reactive alloantibodies in transplant patients. However, the newer flow cytometric (FXM) and ELISA (EXM) crossmatch technologies are increasingly used as substitutes for the CXM. We have compared the sensitivity and reproducibility of FXM vs. EXM and, in general, find them to be quite similar. However, when we compared the agreement of FXM vs. EXM in 112 donor/recipient combinations, we found that they identified different subsets of donor-specific alloantibodies in about 35% of the tests. When compared to the standard CXM method, the EXM correlated much better than did the FXM, yielding a much lower rate of false positive (2.5% vs. 8%) and false negative (7% vs. 18.5%) results. The reduction in time required to obtain a result (3 h) and the cost of materials ($25/test) was identical for the EXM and FXM. We conclude that the ELISA method for crossmatching has advantages over the flow cytometric method as a substitute for the present standard complement-dependent lymphocytotoxicity method.