Skip to main content
. 2016 Oct 22;30(6):1864–1871. doi: 10.1111/jvim.14604

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Comparison of equine crossmatch compatibility scores across 3 techniques: macroscopic evaluation of agglutination by the tube agglutination technique (TUBE), microscopic evaluation of agglutination by the tube technique (MICRO), and gel column agglutination (GEL) in 146 recipient‐donor pairs. The dashed horizontal lines indicate agreement between techniques, and the slanted solid lines demonstrate discordant results.