Study compares point-of-care and lab crossmatch testing in cats
Bottom line
A new study in the Journal of Small Animal Practice evaluated how well a point-of-care antiglobulin-enhanced gel column major crossmatch test agrees with a laboratory-based antiglobulin-enhanced tube method in cats being assessed for transfusion compatibility. The authors, S. L. Blois, A. J. Collier, S. Sanz, and I. Chun, reported moderate agreement between the two methods, suggesting the in-clinic test may be useful, but it doesn't fully mirror results from the laboratory approach. That matters because feline transfusion medicine increasingly relies on crossmatching to detect incompatibilities beyond AB blood type, including naturally occurring alloantibodies tied to non-AB erythrocyte antigens. (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
Why it matters: For veterinary teams, the takeaway is practical rather than abstract. Crossmatching in cats is recommended before transfusion, including in transfusion-naive patients, because clinically relevant incompatibilities can occur even when AB typing appears compatible. Prior work has shown poorer agreement when point-of-care methods lacked antiglobulin enhancement, so this newer comparison helps narrow a real-world question for clinics deciding whether an in-house assay can stand in for a reference lab. Moderate agreement is encouraging, but it also means discordant results remain possible, especially in higher-risk or previously transfused cats where missing an incompatibility could affect transfusion efficacy or safety. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
What to watch: Watch for follow-up data on sensitivity, false-negative rates, and whether crossmatch method choice changes transfusion reactions or post-transfusion PCV response in clinical patients. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
Key facts
- Study
- Evaluation of point-of-care versus laboratory antiglobulin-enhanced major crossmatch testing in cats
- Journal
- Journal of Small Animal Practice
- Species
- Cats
- Comparison
- Point-of-care antiglobulin-enhanced gel column major crossmatch versus laboratory antiglobulin-enhanced tube method
- Main finding
- Moderate agreement
- Takeaway
- The in-clinic test may be useful, but it is not fully interchangeable with laboratory testing
- Clinical context
- Crossmatching is recommended before transfusion, even in transfusion-naive cats
- Why it matters
- Cats can have clinically relevant incompatibilities beyond AB blood type
A new feline transfusion study in the Journal of Small Animal Practice takes on a practical question for emergency and specialty teams: how closely does a point-of-care antiglobulin-enhanced major crossmatch match what a laboratory antiglobulin-enhanced tube method finds? The answer, according to the study by S. L. Blois, A. J. Collier, S. Sanz, and I. Chun, is moderate agreement. In other words, the in-clinic option may be useful, but it shouldn't automatically be treated as interchangeable with laboratory testing. (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
That question has become more important as feline transfusion medicine has moved beyond simple AB blood typing. Over the past two decades, evidence has accumulated that cats can have clinically meaningful incompatibilities outside the AB system, including naturally occurring antibodies against non-AB erythrocyte antigens such as Mik and, more recently, FEA 1. Those findings helped drive recommendations to crossmatch cats before transfusion, even when they have never previously received blood. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
Earlier work also exposed a weakness in some in-clinic methods. A 2021 study found poor agreement between a point-of-care gel-based major crossmatch test without antiglobulin enhancement and an antiglobulin-enhanced laboratory tube method, reinforcing concern that simpler bedside assays may miss relevant incompatibilities. By contrast, the new JSAP paper compares two antiglobulin-enhanced methods, which makes it a more clinically relevant head-to-head for hospitals trying to balance speed, access, and analytical rigor. (sciencedirect.com)
The broader literature suggests why this matters. A 2019 study showed an in-clinic antiglobulin-enhanced gel column test could detect naturally occurring alloantibodies in non-transfused cats, and a 2025 comparison of three feline crossmatch methods concluded there is still no gold standard method in cats. That 2025 work also underscored that method choice, antiglobulin enhancement, and reader interpretation can all influence compatibility calls. The new study fits into that evolving picture: point-of-care testing is getting better, but standardization remains a live issue. (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
Formal outside commentary specific to this paper was limited in the public record at the time of review, but consensus and educational sources point in the same direction. The AVHTM TRACS prevention and monitoring statement includes crossmatch among the key tools used to reduce transfusion risk, and feline transfusion reviews continue to emphasize that non-AB incompatibilities are not rare enough to ignore. Industry and clinical discussion in recent years has increasingly focused less on whether cats should be crossmatched and more on which assay is most sensitive, practical, and reproducible. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
Why it matters: For veterinary professionals, this is really a workflow and risk-stratification story. A point-of-care antiglobulin-enhanced assay may expand access to more sophisticated compatibility testing in hospitals that can't wait on a reference lab, especially in urgent anemia cases. But “moderate agreement” is not the same as equivalence. If a cat has a prior transfusion history, a suspected non-AB incompatibility, or a high-stakes need for maximal sensitivity, clinicians may still prefer laboratory confirmation or interpret an in-clinic compatible result with caution. That is especially relevant because previous studies have linked transfusion history with higher odds of incompatibility, and because clinically important alloantibodies may not be captured equally across methods. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
The study also lands at a time when feline blood typing science is still evolving. Newer descriptions of feline erythrocyte antigens and alloantibodies have made compatibility testing more complex, not less. For general practice and ER teams, that means pre-transfusion planning in cats is increasingly about layered risk reduction: AB typing, donor screening, crossmatching, and close monitoring, rather than relying on any single test result. (academic.oup.com)
What to watch: The next step is outcome-based evidence: whether cats screened with point-of-care antiglobulin-enhanced methods have comparable transfusion efficacy and reaction rates to cats assessed with laboratory methods, and whether future studies can identify where in-clinic testing performs well enough to guide care on its own versus where referral-lab backup remains the safer standard. (pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)