Bennedsen Mette, Berthelsen Lene, Lind Inga
Neisseria Unit, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 2002 Jul;9(4):833-9. doi: 10.1128/cdli.9.4.833-839.2002.
The microimmunofluorescence (MIF) test is considered the "gold standard" for laboratory diagnosis of acute and chronic Chlamydia pneumoniae infection. The performance of a MIF test based on C. pneumoniae antigen from Washington Research Foundation (WRF) was compared with those of assays from Labsystems (LAB) and MRL Diagnostics (MRL) by investigation of sera from three groups of patients: group I, 83 sera from 28 patients with atypical pneumonia; group II, 37 sera from 16 patients with acute C. pneumoniae or Chlamydia psittaci respiratory tract infection confirmed by PCR or culture; group III, 100 sera from 100 persons enrolled in the Copenhagen City Heart Study. The accordance among the results of the WRF assay and the two commercial assays was excellent for the immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibody detection rate (98%). The accordance in detection rates for IgG and IgA antibodies in sera from patients with acute infections was acceptable (87 and 88%), and in sera from group III, it was excellent (95 and 97%). The determinations of endpoint titers were reproducible with <1 dilution step difference for all three methods, except that the mean IgM antibody titer found by the LAB assay was almost 2 dilution steps higher than that found by the other two methods. Although the three assays use different C. pneumoniae strains as antigens, the detection rates and IgG and IgA endpoint titers were similar. The difference in endpoint titers of IgM antibodies is of no major concern, as the diagnosis of acute C. pneumoniae infection rests on the presence of IgM antibodies, not on their level.
微量免疫荧光(MIF)试验被认为是急性和慢性肺炎衣原体感染实验室诊断的“金标准”。通过检测三组患者的血清,比较了基于华盛顿研究基金会(WRF)肺炎衣原体抗原的MIF试验与Labsystems(LAB)和MRL诊断公司(MRL)检测方法的性能:第一组,来自28例非典型肺炎患者的83份血清;第二组,来自16例经PCR或培养确诊的急性肺炎衣原体或鹦鹉热衣原体呼吸道感染患者的37份血清;第三组,来自哥本哈根市心脏研究中100名参与者的100份血清。WRF检测方法与两种商业检测方法在免疫球蛋白M(IgM)抗体检测率方面的一致性极佳(98%)。急性感染患者血清中IgG和IgA抗体检测率的一致性尚可(分别为87%和88%),在第三组血清中,一致性极佳(分别为95%和97%)。除LAB检测方法所测得的平均IgM抗体滴度比其他两种方法测得的高近2个稀释倍数外,所有三种方法的终点滴度测定的重复性均在<1个稀释倍数差异范围内。尽管这三种检测方法使用不同的肺炎衣原体菌株作为抗原,但检测率以及IgG和IgA终点滴度相似。IgM抗体终点滴度的差异并不十分重要,因为急性肺炎衣原体感染的诊断取决于IgM抗体的存在,而非其水平。