摘要
目的评价梅毒甲苯胺红不加热血清反应素试验(TRUST)、快速血浆反应素环状卡片试验(RPR)、梅毒酶联免疫吸附试验(TP-ELISA)和梅毒螺旋体明胶凝集试验(TPPA)在梅毒检测中的应用价值。方法同时用RPR、TRUST、TP-ELISA和TPPA法检测确诊为梅毒患者的血清87份、健康查体人员血清100份及非梅毒患者的血清50份,并评价TRUST、RPR、TP-ELISA和TPPA法检测结果的敏感性和特异性等。ELISA法结合TRUST法双法筛查梅毒抗体,阳性标本再用TPPA法甄别生物学假阳性。结果TRUST、RPR和TPPA法对87份TP-ELISA法检测为阳性标本的敏感性分别为75.86%,74.71%,98.90%,特异性为98.67%,98.67%和100.00%。RPR法与TRUST法、TPPA法与ELISA法比较差异均无显著性意义(P均>0.05);TRUST法与TPPA法、RPR法与TPPA法比较差异均有显著性意义(P均<0.01)。100份健康查体人员血清,RPR、TRUST、TP-ELISA和TPPA法检测均为阴性,50份非梅毒患者血清进行RPR和TRUST法检测,2份阳性。结论TP-ELISA可替代TPPA使用;RPR法和TRUST法存在不同程度的假阳性,TP-ELISA结合TRUST双法筛查血液,用TPPA报告确证试验阳性。
Objective To analyze the syphilis toluidine red unheated serum reagin test （TRUST）, rapid plasma reagin circle card test （RPR）, syphilis enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay （TP-ELISA）, and the gelatin agglutination of Treponema pallidum test （TPPA） test for syphilis at the application of values, set up the laboratory for syphilis testing and reporting system. Methods RPR, TRUST, TP-ELISA, TPPA assay were performed in 87 patients and 100 healthy persons and 50 patients with non-syphilis serum samples were selected as control to evaluate sensitivity, specificity ELISA screening method combining dual TRUST syphilis antibodies were used to detect, positive samples were confirmed by TPPA biological false positive screening. Results TRUST, RPR, TPPA of 87 TP-ELISA assay for the sensitivity of the positive samples were 75.86%, 74.71%, 98.90% ; specificity 98.67%, 98.67% ,100.00%. RPR was compared with that of the TRUST, the difference was not statistically significant（P 〉 0.05）. Comparing TRUST with that of TPPA, the difference had statistical significance（P 〈 0.01 ）. Comparing RPR with that of TPPA, the difference had statistical significance （ P 〈 0.01 ）. TPPA was compared with the ELISA, and the difference was not statistically significant Amongl00 healthy persons serum, RPR, TRUST,TP-ELISA , TPPA assay were negative. Among 50 patients with non-syphilis, RPR, TRUST assay revealed 2 positive. Conclusion TP-ELISA can replace TPPA with not only lower prices, but also easier to use. RPR, TRUST method showed different levels of false positive, and TP-ELISA combined with blood screening TRUST dual method, using TPPA positive could confirm test report.
出处
《中国皮肤性病学杂志》
CAS
北大核心
2009年第6期382-384,共3页
The Chinese Journal of Dermatovenereology
作者简介
林益振（1962-），男，浙江瑞安人，主管检验师，主要从事临床检验工作。
