| 王慧飞,宗 鹏,徐 磊,喻名成,王 楠.Brucellacapt、RBT、SAT、iELISA四种血清学检测方法对布鲁氏菌病检测价值的比较研究[J].,2019,19(4):672-675 |
| Brucellacapt、RBT、SAT、iELISA四种血清学检测方法对布鲁氏菌病检测价值的比较研究 |
| Comparison of Four Serological Detection Methods of Brucellacapt, RBT, SAT and iELISA in the Detection of Brucellosis |
| 投稿时间：2018-07-23 修订日期：2018-08-18 |
| DOI：10.13241/j.cnki.pmb.2019.04.015 |
| 中文关键词: 布鲁氏菌病 血清学试验 虎红平板凝集试验 试管凝集试验 间接酶联免疫吸附试验 |
| 英文关键词: Brucellosis Brucellosis serology test Tiger red agglutination test Tube agglutination test Indirect ELISA |
| 基金项目:国家十三五重点研发专项（2017YFD0500900）；河北省重点研发计划项目（17275608）；学科发展支持计划（XKFZ2017010） |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1077 |
| 全文下载次数: 1815 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 摘要 目的：探讨布鲁氏菌病血清学试验（Brucellacapt）、虎红平板凝集试验（RBT）、试管凝集试验（SAT）、间接酶联免疫吸附试验（iELISA）四种血清学检测方法对布鲁氏菌病检测价值的比较研究。方法：收集近两年110例布鲁氏菌病疑似病例人员的静脉血分离得到血清后进行Brucellacapt、RBT、SAT、iELISA四种血清学检测，以卫生部制定的《布鲁氏菌病诊疗指南》中布鲁氏菌病确诊方法为诊断金标准，将检测结果与其确诊结果进行比较，评价比较各组血清检测方法对布鲁氏菌病的检测价值。结果：110例疑似人员中确诊为布鲁氏菌病阳性91例、阴性19例。Brucellacapt试验阳性89例、阴性21例；RBT试验阳性79例、阴性31例；SAT试验阳性71例、阴性39例；iELISA检验阳性82例、阴性28例。Brucellacapt试验的灵敏度、符合率、Kappa值、ROC曲线下面积均最大，iELISA试验、RBT试验、SAT试验依次减小；iELISA试验的ROC曲线下面积最大，Brucellacapt试验次之，其次为RBT试验，SAT试验的ROC曲线下面积最小。结论：Brucellacapt、RBT、SAT、iELISA四种血清学检测方法对于布鲁氏菌病检测均有一定的检测价值，对于常规普通患者可采用RBT试验、SAT试验进行检查，而对于疑似病例人员可采用灵敏度更高的Bru- cellacapt试验、iELISA试验。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| ABSTRACT Objective: To study the comparative study of four serological detection methods of brucellosis (Brucellacapt), tiger red flat agglutination test (RBT), test tube agglutination test (SAT) and indirect enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (iELISA) for the detec- tion of brucellosis. Methods: Blood samples were collected from 110 suspected cases of brucellosis in the past two years, and then sero- logical tests for Brucellacapt, RBT, SAT and iELISA were carried out in four sera. The diagnostic method of brucellosis in the guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of brucellosis made by the Ministry of health was the diagnostic gold standard. The results were compared with the results of the diagnosis, and the value of serum detection methods for brucellosis was evaluated and compared. Results: Among the 110 suspected cases, 91 were brucellosis positive and 19 were negative. Brucellacapt test was positive 89 cases and negative 21 cases. RBT test was positive 79 cases and negative 31 cases. SAT test was positive 71 cases and negative 39 cases. iELISA test was positive 82 cases and negative 28 cases. The sensitivity, coincidence rate, Kappa value and the area under the ROC curve of Brucellacapt test were the largest. The iELISA test, the RBT test and the SAT test decrease in turn; the area under the ROC curve of the iELISA test was the largest, the Brucellacapt test was the next, the next was the RBT test, and the minimum area under the ROC curve of the SAT test was the smallest. Conclusion: The four serological testing methods of Brucellacapt, RBT, SAT and iELISA have certain value for detection of brucellosis. RBT test and SAT test can be used for routine ordinary patients. The sensitivity of Brucellacapt test and iELISA test can be used for patients with suspected cases. |
|
查看全文
查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
