不同检验方法梅毒检验结果的准确率比较分析
|
摘要
目的分析检验梅毒的不同方法,探究出检验结果的准确率。方法研究对象是本院在2016年2月至2018年2月收治的梅毒患者共计300例,主要应用如下检测方式:甲苯胺红不加热血清试验(TRUST)、梅毒酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)、梅毒螺旋体明胶颗粒凝集试验(TPPA)。结果比较TRUST和ELISA这两种检测方法的检测特异性、阳性检出率、敏感性检测情况,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),应用TPPA检测的患者特异性、阳性检出率、敏感性检测均比其他两种检测方式有优势,结果比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论分析检测梅毒患者的检测方法,应用TPPA检测方法能够得到较好的检测阳性率、特异性和敏感性,要将其作为TRUST与ELISA检出标本的验证环节之中,合理应用这三种检测方法,提高检测的准确性。
Objective To analyze the different methods of syphilis test and explore the accuracy of the test results. Methods 300 syphilis patients were admitted to our hospital from February 2016 to February 2018. The main detection methods were TRUST, ELISA and TPPA. Results There was no significant difference in specificity, positive detection rate and sensitivity between TRUST and ELISA(P>0.05). The specificity, positive detection rate and sensitivity of TPPA were superior to the other two methods, the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusion TPPA can get better detection positive rate, specificity and sensitivity by analyzing the detection methods of syphilis patients, it is necessary to use TPPA as the verification link of TRUST and ELISA detection samples, and rationally use these three detection methods to improve the accuracy of detection.
Objective To analyze the different methods of syphilis test and explore the accuracy of the test results. Methods 300 syphilis patients were admitted to our hospital from February 2016 to February 2018. The main detection methods were TRUST, ELISA and TPPA. Results There was no significant difference in specificity, positive detection rate and sensitivity between TRUST and ELISA(P>0.05). The specificity, positive detection rate and sensitivity of TPPA were superior to the other two methods, the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05). Conclusion TPPA can get better detection positive rate, specificity and sensitivity by analyzing the detection methods of syphilis patients, it is necessary to use TPPA as the verification link of TRUST and ELISA detection samples, and rationally use these three detection methods to improve the accuracy of detection.
引文
[1]王明建.梅毒检验3种不同方法检测梅毒螺旋体的结果准确率比较[J].中国医药指南,2012(25):581-583.
[2]夏瑞,李妹英,陈苗水,等.TPPA、ELISA、TRUST3种梅毒检测方法的比较[J].现代预防医学,2008,35(24):4864-4865.
[3]程艳杰,王广杰,王旭梅,等.梅毒螺旋体血清学检测方法的实验室评价[J].中国皮肤性病学杂志,2005,19(8):503-504.
[4]项明玉,殷方兰,戴臻,等.上海嘉定区2002-2006年妊娠梅毒流行病学分析[J].中国皮肤性病学杂志,2008,22(10):606-607.
[5]戴宗成.不同检验方法梅毒检验结果的准确率比较分析[J].吉林医学,2013,34(36):7613-7613.
[6]马旭.不同检验方法梅毒检验结果的准确率比较分析[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2015,15(69):166-167.
[7]谢昭宁.多种不同梅毒检验方法检测梅毒螺旋体的结果准确率比较[J].安徽医药,2013,17(5):797-799.
[8]李秀年.三种不同方法检测梅毒螺旋体的结果准确性研究[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2015,15(52):74-74.
[2]夏瑞,李妹英,陈苗水,等.TPPA、ELISA、TRUST3种梅毒检测方法的比较[J].现代预防医学,2008,35(24):4864-4865.
[3]程艳杰,王广杰,王旭梅,等.梅毒螺旋体血清学检测方法的实验室评价[J].中国皮肤性病学杂志,2005,19(8):503-504.
[4]项明玉,殷方兰,戴臻,等.上海嘉定区2002-2006年妊娠梅毒流行病学分析[J].中国皮肤性病学杂志,2008,22(10):606-607.
[5]戴宗成.不同检验方法梅毒检验结果的准确率比较分析[J].吉林医学,2013,34(36):7613-7613.
[6]马旭.不同检验方法梅毒检验结果的准确率比较分析[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2015,15(69):166-167.
[7]谢昭宁.多种不同梅毒检验方法检测梅毒螺旋体的结果准确率比较[J].安徽医药,2013,17(5):797-799.
[8]李秀年.三种不同方法检测梅毒螺旋体的结果准确性研究[J].世界最新医学信息文摘,2015,15(52):74-74.