Table 6: Salient features of contemporary studies on luminex crossmatch.
| Authors | No. of samples (% positive) | Class I positive | Class II positive | Both positive | Sample nature | Conclusions |
| Billen, et al. [10] | 165 (19.4) | 16 | 15 | 1 | LXM more sensitive than FCXM. | |
| Huh, et al. [12] | 55 (32.7) | 6 | 5 | 7 | PRA I/II > 20% | Sensitivity of LXM class I 62.5% , class II 100%. |
| Mishra, et al. (present study) [8,13] | 705 (39.3) | 40 | 155 | 82 | Pretransplant | LXM useful with PRA for detection of sensitization. |
| Gulliuame, et al. [5] | 106 (77.8) | 26 | 28 | 30 | LXM has low sensitivity for anti A and B. | |
| Caro-Oleas, et al. [18] | 61 - all | - | - | - | Known sera & lysates | SAB more sensitive than LXM. |
| Riethmuller, et al. [19] | 155 (8.4) | 7 | 6 | - | PRA + | SAB I and LXM I are useful for AMR prediction. |
| Vimal, et al. [14] | 126 (25.4%) | 6 | 21 | 5 | Pretransplant | CDCXM neg DSA positivity no effect on short term outcome. |
Legend: CDCXM: Complement dependent cytotoxicity crossmatch; FCXM: Flow cytometry crossmatch; LXM: Luminex crossmatch; No: Number; +: Positive; PRA: Panel reactive antibodies; SAB: Single antigen bead test; DSA: Donor specific antibodies; &: and.