山羊布鲁氏菌病不同血清学检测方法的比较
|
摘要
为比较山羊布鲁氏菌病不同血清学检测方法,继而为山羊布鲁氏菌病的临床检测提供参考,对采集到的423份血清样品分别用虎红平板凝集试验(RBT)、试管凝集试验(SAT)和竞争酶联免疫吸附试验(c ELISA)3种方法进行检测,比较3种方法的一致性、敏感性和特异性。结果表明:RBT和SAT、cELISA和RBT、c ELISA和SAT的Kappa值均大于0.75,一致性较好;RBT和SAT符合率最高,RBT敏感性最好,cELISA特异性最好。因而建议在开展山羊布鲁氏菌病检测时,可先用RBT初筛,再用SAT或c ELISA复检。
In order to compare different serological detection methods for brucellosis in goats,and then to provide reference for its clinical detection,423 serum samples were tested respectively by rose bengal plate test(RBT),serum agglutination test(SAT)and competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay(cELISA),and the consistency,coincidence,sensitivity and specificity of the three methods were compared. The results showed that all the Kappa values of RBT and SAT,cELISA and RBT,cELISA and SAT were higher than 0.75,showing a good consistency. Besides,the coincidence rate between RBT and SAT remained the highest,both the sensitivity of RBT and the speci?city of cELISA were veri?ed to be the best,hence,it was suggested that,to achieve the best effect,RBT could be used for primary screening,and then SAT or cELISA were used for re-inspection when the brucellosis in goat was detected.
In order to compare different serological detection methods for brucellosis in goats,and then to provide reference for its clinical detection,423 serum samples were tested respectively by rose bengal plate test(RBT),serum agglutination test(SAT)and competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay(cELISA),and the consistency,coincidence,sensitivity and specificity of the three methods were compared. The results showed that all the Kappa values of RBT and SAT,cELISA and RBT,cELISA and SAT were higher than 0.75,showing a good consistency. Besides,the coincidence rate between RBT and SAT remained the highest,both the sensitivity of RBT and the speci?city of cELISA were veri?ed to be the best,hence,it was suggested that,to achieve the best effect,RBT could be used for primary screening,and then SAT or cELISA were used for re-inspection when the brucellosis in goat was detected.
引文
[1]曹小安.我国西北地区羊布鲁氏菌分子流行病学及抗原表位多肽的筛选[D].北京:中国农业科学院,2018.
[2]赵屹钦,常华,严玉霖,等.布氏杆菌病研究进展[J].中国兽医医药杂志,2017,36(4):86-88.
[3]谢亚平,钟礼立,唐艳娇,等.非疫区14例散发性人布鲁氏菌病病例临床分析[J].临床研究,2019,27(2):21-23.
[4]崔步云,姜海.2005—2016年全国布鲁氏菌病监测数据分析[J].疾病监测,2018,33(3):188-192.
[5]毛景东,王景龙,杨艳玲.布鲁氏菌病的研究进展[J].中国畜牧兽医,2011,38(1):222-227.
[6]罗成群.不同方法检测布鲁氏菌抗体的比较分析[J].中国畜牧兽医文摘,2017,33(11):57.
[7]NIELSENK.Diagnosisofbrucellosisbyserology[J].Veterinary microbiology,2002,90(1/4):447-459.
[8]马丽梅.布鲁氏菌病诊断技术的研究进展[J].兽医导刊,2018(8):71.
[9]李慧.布鲁氏菌病的血清学检测方法比较[J].中国畜牧兽医文摘,2013,29(3):46-47.
[10]向导.家畜布鲁氏菌病的实验室检查方法[J].中国畜牧兽医文摘,2016,32(5):49-50.
[11]吴星星,李爱巧,杨启元,等.布鲁氏菌病诊断方法的研究进展[J].新疆畜牧业,2013(1):16-20.
[12]束鸿鹏.布鲁氏菌病血清学检测方法比较和云南陆良奶山羊布鲁氏菌病流行病学调查[D].南京:南京农业大学,2014.
[13]臧金凤,尚估军,孙继国,等.酶联免疫吸附试验在布鲁氏菌病检测中的研究进展[C]//河北省畜牧兽医学会.“转型升级、体制增效、粪污处理、环保生态”科技论文集.石家庄:河北省畜牧兽医学会,2015:42-45.
[2]赵屹钦,常华,严玉霖,等.布氏杆菌病研究进展[J].中国兽医医药杂志,2017,36(4):86-88.
[3]谢亚平,钟礼立,唐艳娇,等.非疫区14例散发性人布鲁氏菌病病例临床分析[J].临床研究,2019,27(2):21-23.
[4]崔步云,姜海.2005—2016年全国布鲁氏菌病监测数据分析[J].疾病监测,2018,33(3):188-192.
[5]毛景东,王景龙,杨艳玲.布鲁氏菌病的研究进展[J].中国畜牧兽医,2011,38(1):222-227.
[6]罗成群.不同方法检测布鲁氏菌抗体的比较分析[J].中国畜牧兽医文摘,2017,33(11):57.
[7]NIELSENK.Diagnosisofbrucellosisbyserology[J].Veterinary microbiology,2002,90(1/4):447-459.
[8]马丽梅.布鲁氏菌病诊断技术的研究进展[J].兽医导刊,2018(8):71.
[9]李慧.布鲁氏菌病的血清学检测方法比较[J].中国畜牧兽医文摘,2013,29(3):46-47.
[10]向导.家畜布鲁氏菌病的实验室检查方法[J].中国畜牧兽医文摘,2016,32(5):49-50.
[11]吴星星,李爱巧,杨启元,等.布鲁氏菌病诊断方法的研究进展[J].新疆畜牧业,2013(1):16-20.
[12]束鸿鹏.布鲁氏菌病血清学检测方法比较和云南陆良奶山羊布鲁氏菌病流行病学调查[D].南京:南京农业大学,2014.
[13]臧金凤,尚估军,孙继国,等.酶联免疫吸附试验在布鲁氏菌病检测中的研究进展[C]//河北省畜牧兽医学会.“转型升级、体制增效、粪污处理、环保生态”科技论文集.石家庄:河北省畜牧兽医学会,2015:42-45.