TP-ELISA法检测梅毒抗体假阳性结果的影响因素

赵花,李军民,张红

武警医学 ›› 2014, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (10) : 1003-1004.

PDF(404 KB)
PDF(404 KB)
武警医学 ›› 2014, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (10) : 1003-1004.
论 著

TP-ELISA法检测梅毒抗体假阳性结果的影响因素

  • 赵花,李军民,张红
作者信息 +

Uncertain factors of detecting Treponema pallidum antibody by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay

  • ZHAO Hua, LI Junmin, ZHANG Hong
Author information +
文章历史 +

摘要

目的 探讨TP-ELISA法检测梅毒特异性抗体假阳性结果的影响因素。方法 采用TP-ELISA法对2619例标本进行检测,初检阳性者再行TRUST试验和TPPA确认试验,结果判定以TPPA为准,比较TP-ELISA法与TPPA法的符合率。结果 231例TP-ELISA法检测阳性标本中S/CO值>1.0者201例,经TRUST复检后阳性者169例,经TPPA确认阳性者196例,TP-ELISA法和TPPA的符合率为97.5%。在S/CO为0.70~1.0的30例标本中,经TRUST复检后阳性者12例,经TPPA确证为阳性者19例,TP-ELISA法和TPPA的符合率为63.3%。结论 TP-ELISA法检测阳性标本中S/CO值为0.70~1.0者应采用TRUST和 TPPA法联合检验,以减少误诊及漏检。

Abstract

Objective To study the uncertain factors of the false positive results of Treponema pallidum specific antibody(anti-TP) detected by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA). Methods Anti-TP was detected in 2619 samples by ELISA. The positive samples were examined again by tolulized red unheated serum test (TRUST) and T. pallidum particle assay (TPPA). Results The S/CO>1.0 in 231 positive samples detected by ELISA were 201, The 201 positive samples were examined again by TRUST and confirmed positive by TPPA. The positive samples by TRUST were 169, and by TPPA were 196. The coincidence rate of ELISA and TPPA was 97.5%. In 30 samples’ S/CO between 0.7 and 1.0, the positive samples examined again by TRUST were 12, and confirmed positive by TPPA were 19. The coincidence rate of ELISA and TPPA was 63.3%. Conclusions The method of ELISA is affected by the uncertain factors, So false positive results exist. The sample’s S/CO between 0.7 and 1.0 should be examined by TRUST and TPPA jointly.

关键词

梅毒螺旋体 / 特异性抗体检测 / 非特异性抗体检测 / 确认试验

Key words

TP / ELISA / TRUST / TPPA

引用本文

导出引用
赵花,李军民,张红. TP-ELISA法检测梅毒抗体假阳性结果的影响因素[J]. 武警医学. 2014, 25(10): 1003-1004
ZHAO Hua, LI Junmin, ZHANG Hong. Uncertain factors of detecting Treponema pallidum antibody by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay[J]. Medical Journal of the Chinese People Armed Police Forces. 2014, 25(10): 1003-1004
中图分类号: R446.111    R759.1   

参考文献

[1] 彭明喜. 酶联免疫吸附试验检测梅毒抗体假阳性的原因分析[J]. 现代实用医学,2006,18(2): 127-128.
[2] 王长海,吕长坤. 梅毒螺旋体感染筛选方法的临床研究[J].国际检验医学杂志,2010,31(6):609-610.
[3] 曹树正,王 斌.梅毒检测“灰区”样本分析[J].实用医学杂志,2010,26(3):476-477.
[4] 林益振,陈爱金. TP-ELISA和RPR联合检查梅毒抗体的缺陷分析与对策[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志,2012,12(22):2919-2921.
[5] 毕红琳,马 娟,朱中梁,等.3种方法检测梅毒螺旋体抗体的结果比较[J].检验医学与临床,2011,8(5):582-583.
[6] 徐树良,石 斌,谈 唯,等.荧光定量PCR对ELISA-HBsAg“灰区”标本的再分析[J].中国输血杂志,2003,16(1):24-25.
[7] 容 莹,孙秀双. 乙型肝炎表面抗原检测结果分析及灰区设置探讨[J]. 检验医学与临床,2010,8(7):1593-1595.
[8] 武建国.老年人抗梅毒螺旋体抗体测定[J].临床检验杂志,2006,24(4):241-243.
[9] 邓红艳,赫兰辉.老年患者血清梅毒抗体酶联免疫吸附试验假阳性结果分析[J].检验医学与临床,2011,8(2):151.
[10] 康淑霞,朱安友,王凤超,等,ELISA法筛查联合TRUST、TPPA在梅毒诊断中的应用价值[J]. 实用全科医学,2007,6(5):545-546.
[11] 华文浩,孙继云,赵 辉,等.4种梅毒血清学检测方法评价[J]. 国际检验医学杂志,2011,32(9):1704-1705.
[12] 刘晓敏,郑 炘,曾秋耀. 探讨ELISA方法中HBsAg弱阳性标本复查方式及其意义[J]. 检验与临床,2010,48(11):84-85.

PDF(404 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/