时间分辨荧光免疫技术在梅毒特异性抗体筛查中的应用研究
|
摘要
目的探讨时间分辨荧光免疫技术(TRFIA)在梅毒特异性抗体检测中的应用价值。方法收集240例梅毒患者和150例健康者血清标本,采用TRFIA、梅毒螺旋体酶联免疫吸附试验(TP-ELISA)、梅毒螺旋体明胶颗粒凝集试验(TPPA)进行梅毒特异性抗体检测,比较检测灵敏度、特异度及阳性率。结果TRFIA、TP-ELISA、TPPA检测灵敏度分别为100.00%、98.75%、97.92%,比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);特异度分别为99.33%、98.67%、100.00%。TRFIA检测假阳性率为0.67%,假阴性率为0.00%;TP-ELISA检测假阳性率为1.33%,假阴性率为1.25%,TRFIA检测假阳性率和假阴性率均低于TP-ELISA(P<0.05)。结论 TRFIA检测梅毒特异性抗体灵敏度和特异度高,结果准确可靠,可用于梅毒特异性抗体的常规筛查,值得推广应用。
Objective To investigate the application of time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay(TRFIA)in the detection of specific antibody of syphilis.Methods Specific antibody of syphilis was detected in serum samples of 240 cases of syphilis and 150 healthy subjects by TRFIA,Treponemal pallidum particle agglutination(TPPA)and Treponemal pallidum enzyme linked immunosorbent assay(TP-ELISA).The sensitivity,specificity and positivity of these three methods were compared.Results The sensitivity of TRFIA,TP-ELISA,TPPA were 100.00%,98.75% and 97.92%,without significantly differences(P>0.05),and the specificity were 99.33%,98.67%and 100.00%.The false positive rate of TRFIA was 0.67%,and the false negative rate was 0.00%.The false positive rate of TP-ELISA was 1.33%,and the false negative rate was 1.25%.False positive rate and false negative rate of TRFIA were lower than TP-ELISA(P<0.05).Conclusion TRFIA could be with high sensitivity and specificity in syphilis specific antibody test,and could be used for routine screening of syphilis specific antibody.
Objective To investigate the application of time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay(TRFIA)in the detection of specific antibody of syphilis.Methods Specific antibody of syphilis was detected in serum samples of 240 cases of syphilis and 150 healthy subjects by TRFIA,Treponemal pallidum particle agglutination(TPPA)and Treponemal pallidum enzyme linked immunosorbent assay(TP-ELISA).The sensitivity,specificity and positivity of these three methods were compared.Results The sensitivity of TRFIA,TP-ELISA,TPPA were 100.00%,98.75% and 97.92%,without significantly differences(P>0.05),and the specificity were 99.33%,98.67%and 100.00%.The false positive rate of TRFIA was 0.67%,and the false negative rate was 0.00%.The false positive rate of TP-ELISA was 1.33%,and the false negative rate was 1.25%.False positive rate and false negative rate of TRFIA were lower than TP-ELISA(P<0.05).Conclusion TRFIA could be with high sensitivity and specificity in syphilis specific antibody test,and could be used for routine screening of syphilis specific antibody.
引文
[1]彭慧芬.4种梅毒血清学检测方法的适用性探讨[J].国际检验医学杂志,2013,34(21):2929-2930.
[2]王欣俞,王德辉,刘淑娟.新生儿64例筛查梅毒血清方法学的临床应用[J].中华临床医师杂志,2014,8(9):1781-1783.
[3]Chen ZQ,Zhang GC,Gong XD,et al.Syphilis in China:results of a national surveillance programme[J].Lancet,2007,369(9556):132-138.
[4]Tucker JD,Chen XS,Peeling RW.Syphilis and social upheaval in China[J].N Engl J Med,2010,362(18):1658-1661.
[5]Gloyd S,Chai S,Mercer MA.Antenatal syphilis in sub-Saharan Africa:missed opportunities for mortality reduction[J].Health Policy Plan,2001,16(1):29-34.
[6]Waston-Jones D,Oliff M,Triss Prestholt F,et al.Antenatal syphilis screening in sub-Saharan Africa:lessons learned from Tanzania[J].Trop Med Int Health,2005,10(9):939-943.
[7]戴薇,肖九长,李晶.三种梅毒血清学检测方法在临床中的应用与评价[J].临床合理用药,2011,4(8):59-60.
[8]张晓红.TP-ELISA与TPPA梅毒检测方法的比较[J].中外健康文摘,2013,10(6):22-23.
[9]董旭才,刘昕阳,张婧,等.酶联免疫吸附法检测梅毒抗体试验灰区结果分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2014,35(5):598-600.
[10]陈彬,徐克,林小敏,等.81946例住院患者梅毒抗体检测结果分析[J].中华传染病杂志,2013,31(8):479-482.
[11]文海燕,张华荣,陈正明,等.梅毒检测方法的研究进展[J].中国皮肤性病学杂志,2012,26(4):354-360.
[12]张波.几种梅毒血清学检测方法的比较与分析[J].实验与检验医学,2013,31(2):173-175.
[13]王世真.分子核医学[M].北京:中国协和医科大学出版社,2001:163-169.
[14]秦卫仕,田蓉,匡安仁.中国分辨荧光分析和放射免疫分析测量精度的比较[J].同位素,2002,15(2):115.
[15]廖群,刘小玲,郭惠.时间分辨免疫荧光法用于梅毒抗体测定的探讨[J].中国实验诊断学,2014,18(3):447-450.
[2]王欣俞,王德辉,刘淑娟.新生儿64例筛查梅毒血清方法学的临床应用[J].中华临床医师杂志,2014,8(9):1781-1783.
[3]Chen ZQ,Zhang GC,Gong XD,et al.Syphilis in China:results of a national surveillance programme[J].Lancet,2007,369(9556):132-138.
[4]Tucker JD,Chen XS,Peeling RW.Syphilis and social upheaval in China[J].N Engl J Med,2010,362(18):1658-1661.
[5]Gloyd S,Chai S,Mercer MA.Antenatal syphilis in sub-Saharan Africa:missed opportunities for mortality reduction[J].Health Policy Plan,2001,16(1):29-34.
[6]Waston-Jones D,Oliff M,Triss Prestholt F,et al.Antenatal syphilis screening in sub-Saharan Africa:lessons learned from Tanzania[J].Trop Med Int Health,2005,10(9):939-943.
[7]戴薇,肖九长,李晶.三种梅毒血清学检测方法在临床中的应用与评价[J].临床合理用药,2011,4(8):59-60.
[8]张晓红.TP-ELISA与TPPA梅毒检测方法的比较[J].中外健康文摘,2013,10(6):22-23.
[9]董旭才,刘昕阳,张婧,等.酶联免疫吸附法检测梅毒抗体试验灰区结果分析[J].国际检验医学杂志,2014,35(5):598-600.
[10]陈彬,徐克,林小敏,等.81946例住院患者梅毒抗体检测结果分析[J].中华传染病杂志,2013,31(8):479-482.
[11]文海燕,张华荣,陈正明,等.梅毒检测方法的研究进展[J].中国皮肤性病学杂志,2012,26(4):354-360.
[12]张波.几种梅毒血清学检测方法的比较与分析[J].实验与检验医学,2013,31(2):173-175.
[13]王世真.分子核医学[M].北京:中国协和医科大学出版社,2001:163-169.
[14]秦卫仕,田蓉,匡安仁.中国分辨荧光分析和放射免疫分析测量精度的比较[J].同位素,2002,15(2):115.
[15]廖群,刘小玲,郭惠.时间分辨免疫荧光法用于梅毒抗体测定的探讨[J].中国实验诊断学,2014,18(3):447-450.