<?xml version="1.0"?><rdf:RDF xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:edm="http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/" xmlns:wgs84_pos="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:rdaGr2="http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2" xmlns:oai="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:ore="http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/" xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U/8cb35876-415c-449b-8d94-560fb80ee28d/PDF"><dcterms:extent>244 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U/c81a9195-a8ff-4a16-972a-1782007fae64/TEXT"><dcterms:extent>46 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U/19115697-ddc9-4ed1-b441-6970d2b09c0f/PDF"><dcterms:extent>238 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U/df4da560-ba06-4714-a57e-85deb631e0da/TEXT"><dcterms:extent>48 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:TimeSpan rdf:about="1929-2026"><edm:begin xml:lang="en">1929</edm:begin><edm:end xml:lang="en">2026</edm:end></edm:TimeSpan><edm:ProvidedCHO rdf:about="URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U"><dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://www.dlib.si/details/urn:nbn:si:spr-a30mfzkp" /><dcterms:issued>2022</dcterms:issued><dc:creator>Bricl, Irena</dc:creator><dc:creator>Lehner, Natalija</dc:creator><dc:creator>Mrak, Janja</dc:creator><dc:contributor>Mrak, Janja</dc:contributor><dc:format xml:lang="sl">453-461 str.</dc:format><dc:format xml:lang="sl">letnik:91</dc:format><dc:format xml:lang="sl">številka:iss. 11-12</dc:format><dc:identifier>DOI:10.6016/ZdravVestn.3276</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>ISSN:1318-0347</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>COBISSID_HOST:140653827</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language><dc:publisher xml:lang="sl">Slovensko zdravniško društvo</dc:publisher><dcterms:isPartOf xml:lang="sl">Zdravniški vestnik</dcterms:isPartOf><dc:subject xml:lang="en">immunising events</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">immunoglobuline anti-D</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">imunizirajoči dogodki</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">imunoglobulin anti-D</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">preventive inoculation</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">preventivno vbrizganje</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">RhD</dc:subject><dcterms:temporal rdf:resource="1929-2026" /><dc:title xml:lang="sl">Perinatalna zaščita z imunoglobulinom anti-D in vpliv senzibilizacije na antigen RhD med nosečnicami v Sloveniji| Perinatal prophylaxis with immunoglobulin anti-D and the impact on RhD sensitizations among pregnant women in Slovenia|</dc:title><dc:description xml:lang="sl">Background: Sensitizations to red blood cell antigens may be a relevant cause of foetal and neonatal- perinatal morbidity. Of all red blood cell antigens, only alloantibodies to antigen RhD (D) can be prevented during pregnancy using perinatal preventive inoculation with anti-D immunoglobulin (Ig anti-D). Nevertheless, new sensitizations to antigen D among preg-nant women are detected. The purpose of this article is to determine the incidence of sensitizations to antigen D among pregnant women in Slovenia in the period from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020 and to identify the most likely causes for sensitizations.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records and the laboratory data in the transfusion information system for pregnant women, in whom we detected antibodies anti-D for the first time, from 1 January 2010 to 31 December 2020. We identified the most likely causes of sensitisation to anti-D from the data. The research was conducted at the Blood Transfusion Centre of Slovenia in Ljubljana (ZTM) and the Centre for Transfusion Medicine at the University Medical Centre Maribor (CTM).Results: We detected 69 new sensitizations to D antigen in the reviewed period, which means that 0.16% of D-negative (D-neg) pregnant women or 0.26% D-neg pregnant women at risk were sensitized. 45% of sensitizations occurred during pregnancy, 29% after childbirth of a D-positive (D-poz) child, 9% after previous abortion. Of the 45% sensitizations during pregnancy, 8 cases (26%) could be prevented, 1 case (3%) could not be prevented, other cases (71%) have most likely oc-curred as a result of silent foetomaternal haemorrhage (FMK). Of the 38% of sensitizations that occurred after a previous birth or abortion, 4 cases (15%) could be prevented; 2 cases after abortion, 1 case after childbirth abroad, 1 case of refused protection. We could prevent 12 cases (17.5%) of all sensitizations that most likely occurred due to incomplete compliance with the guidelines for preventive inoculation with Ig anti-D (in 2 cases (3%) pregnant women refused protection), 1 case (1.5%) could not be prevented (the pregnant woman did not come to the gynaecologist despite the bleeding).Conclusion: More than 80% of sensitizations occurred despite following guidelines for their prevention; 12 cases (17.5%) could be prevented (7 cases of incomplete perinatal inoculation with Ig anti-D, 1 case of missed postpartum protection and 2 after abortion, 2 cases of refused protection), one case (1.5%) could not be prevented (one pregnant woman did not visit a gynaecologist despite the bleeding). A new measure to prevent sensitization could be routine protection with Ig anti-D in the second trimester of pregnancy and additional educational programs before planning a pregnancy. These programmes should pay particular attention to identifying and responding to potential sensitizing events in pregnancy, blood type D, and the consequences of refusing inoculation with Ig anti-D. Targeted protection represents one of the measures in this area</dc:description><dc:description xml:lang="sl">Izhodišča: Senzibilizacije na eritrocitne antigene so lahko pomemben vzrok perinatalne obolevnosti plodov in novoro-jenčkov. Od vseh eritrocitnih antigenov lahko med nosečnostjo preprečujemo nastanek aloprotiteles le proti antigenu RhD (D), in sicer s perinatalnim preventivnim vbrizganjem imunoglobulina anti-D (Ig anti-D). Kljub temu odkrivamo med noseč-nicami nove senzibilizacije na antigen D. Namen članka je določiti incidenco senzibilizacij na antigen D med nosečnicami v Sloveniji v obdobju od 1. 1. 2010 do 31. 12. 2020 ter prepoznati najverjetnejše vzroke za njihov nastanek. Metode: Retrospektivno smo pregledali medicinsko dokumentacijo z anamnestičnimi podatki in izvide laboratorijskih preiskav v transfuzijskem informacijskem sistemu za nosečnice, pri katerih smo v izbranem obdobju prvič odkrili proti-telesa anti-D. Iz dokumentacije smo razbrali najverjetnejše vzroke za nastanek anti-D. Raziskava je potekala na Zavodu RS za transfuzijsko medicino v Ljubljani (ZTM) ter na Centru za transfuzijsko medicino v Univerzitetnem kliničnem centru Maribor (CTM). Rezultati: V obravnavanem obdobju smo odkrili 69 novih senzibilizacij na antigen D, kar pomeni, da se je senzibiliziralo 0,16 % D-negativnih (D-neg) nosečnic oz. 0,26 % D-neg nosečnic s tveganjem. Med nosečnostjo je nastalo 45 % senzibili-zacij, 29 % po rojstvu D-pozitivnega (D-poz) otroka, 9 % po predhodni prekinitvi nosečnosti. Od 45 % senzibilizacij med nosečnostjo bi lahko preprečili 8 primerov (26 %), 1 primera (3 %) nismo mogli preprečiti, ostali primeri (71 %) pa so naj-verjetneje posledica tihih fetomaternalnih krvavitev (FMK). Od 38 % senzibilizacij, ki so nastale po predhodnem porodu ali prekinitvi nosečnosti, bi lahko preprečili 4 primere (15 %): 2 primera po prekinitvi nosečnosti, 1 primer po rojstvu D-poz otroka v tujini, 1 primer zavrnitve zaščite. Skupno bi lahko preprečili 12 senzibilizacij (17,5 %), ki so najverjetneje posledica nepopolnega upoštevanja smernic za preventivno vbrizganje Ig anti-D (med njimi sta 2 nosečnici (3 %) zaščito zavrnili), enega primera (1,5 %) nismo mogli preprečiti (nosečnica kljub krvavitvi ni prišla h ginekologu).Zaključek: Več kot 80 % senzibilizacij je nastalo kljub upoštevanju smernic za njihovo preprečevanje, 12 primerov (17,5 %) bi lahko preprečili (7 primerov nepopolne perinatalne zaščite z Ig anti-D, 1 primer neizvedene zaščite po rojstvu D-poz ot-roka in 2 po prekinitvi nosečnosti, 2 primera zavrnjene zaščite), enega primera (1,5 %) pa kljub upoštevanju smernic nismo mogli preprečiti, ker nosečnica kljub krvavitvi ni obiskala ginekologa. Novi ukrep za preprečevanje senzibilizacij bi lahko bila rutinska zaščita z Ig anti-D še v drugem trimesečju nosečnosti in dodatni izobraževalni programi pred načrtovanjem nosečnosti. Posebno pozornost bi bilo potrebno nameniti prepoznavanju in ukrepanju ob možnih dogodkih, ko lahko pride do senzibiliziranja v nosečnosti, krvni skupini D ter ob posledicah zavrnitve zaščite z Ig anti-D. Ciljana zaščita že pred-stavlja enega od ukrepov na tem področju</dc:description><edm:type>TEXT</edm:type><dc:type xml:lang="sl">znanstveno časopisje</dc:type><dc:type xml:lang="en">journals</dc:type><dc:type rdf:resource="http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785" /></edm:ProvidedCHO><ore:Aggregation rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U"><edm:aggregatedCHO rdf:resource="URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U" /><edm:isShownBy rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U/8cb35876-415c-449b-8d94-560fb80ee28d/PDF" /><edm:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/" /><edm:provider>Slovenian National E-content Aggregator</edm:provider><edm:intermediateProvider xml:lang="en">National and University Library of Slovenia</edm:intermediateProvider><edm:dataProvider xml:lang="sl">Slovensko zdravniško društvo</edm:dataProvider><edm:object rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U/maxi/edm" /><edm:isShownAt rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:doc-LBJF4I4U" /></ore:Aggregation></rdf:RDF>