West B, Walraven G, Morison L, Brouwers J, Bailey R
Reproductive Health Programme, MRC Laboratories, Farafenni and Fajara, PO Box 273, Banjul, Gambia.
Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Aug;78(4):282-5. doi: 10.1136/sti.78.4.282.
To assess the rapid plasma reagin (RPR) test performance in the field and to evaluate a new rapid syphilis test (RST) as a primary screen for syphilis.
1325 women of reproductive age from rural communities in the Gambia were tested for syphilis seropositivity using a RPR 18 mm circle card and a RST strip. Within 1 week a repeat RPR and a TPHA test were carried out using standard techniques in the laboratory.
Comparing field tests to a diagnosis of "active" syphilis defined as laboratory RPR and TPHA positive, the RPR test was 77.5% sensitive and 94.1% specific; the RST was 75.0% sensitive and 95.2% specific. The RST was easier to use and interpret than the RPR test especially where field conditions were difficult. In this setting with a low prevalence of syphilis in the community (3%), the chance of someone with a positive test being confirmed as having serologically active syphilis was less than 50% for both tests.
The appropriateness of syphilis screening using RPR testing in antenatal clinics and health centres should be questioned if there is a low prevalence in the population, conditions for testing are poor, and resources limited. There is still an urgent need for an appropriate rapid syphilis test for field use.
评估快速血浆反应素(RPR)试验在现场的性能,并评价一种新型梅毒快速检测(RST)作为梅毒初步筛查方法的效果。
使用RPR 18mm圆形卡片和RST试纸条对来自冈比亚农村社区的1325名育龄妇女进行梅毒血清学阳性检测。在1周内,在实验室采用标准技术进行重复RPR和梅毒螺旋体血凝试验(TPHA)检测。
将现场检测结果与定义为实验室RPR和TPHA均呈阳性的“活动性”梅毒诊断结果相比较,RPR试验的灵敏度为77.5%,特异度为94.1%;RST的灵敏度为75.0%,特异度为95.2%。RST比RPR试验更易于使用和解读,尤其是在现场条件困难的情况下。在该社区梅毒患病率较低(3%)的情况下,两种检测方法检测结果呈阳性的人被确诊为血清学活动性梅毒的可能性均小于50%。
如果人群患病率较低、检测条件较差且资源有限,那么在产前诊所和健康中心使用RPR检测进行梅毒筛查的适宜性值得质疑。仍然迫切需要一种适用于现场使用的合适的梅毒快速检测方法。