Quiroga T, Goycoolea M, Tagle R, Gonzalez F, Rodriguez L, Villarroel L
Central Laboratory, UDA Clinical Laboratories Diagnostic Center, School of Medicine, Pontificia Catholic University of Chile, Santiago.
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 1992 Nov-Dec;15(8):651-6. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(92)90066-3.
Serum samples from 85 patients with proven typhoid fever, 11 patients with p-typhoidal fever, 101 patients with febrile non-typhoidal, and 130 healthy subjects were tested for immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgA, and IgM antilipopolysaccharide (LPS) of Salmonella typhi antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Widal test. The levels of all three classes of immunoglobulin anti-LPS of S. typhi were higher in typhoid patients than in healthy or febrile nontyphoidal groups; we selected various combinations between the three classes of immunoglobulin to obtain the best combination of sensitivity and specificity. The sum of the absorbance values obtained from the ELISA assay for IgG+IgA+IgM (sigma lgs) was the best choice for diagnostic utility for typhoid fever. We selected a positive test at a decision level of sigma lgs > or = 1.2 with a sensitivity of 94% and a specificity of 92% with a frequency of false negative of 5.9%. The frequency of false positives for healthy controls was 7.7% and, for the febrile nontyphoidal group, it was 7.9%. We also compared receiver (or relative) operating characteristic (ROC) curves for the diagnostic usefulness of the ELISA with that of the Widal test, whose merits and limitations, especially in endemic regions, are discussed. The ELISA assay was much more sensitive and specific than any combination of the Widal test, and hence it could be a useful tool for the serologic diagnosis of typhoidal fever with a single blood sample.
采用酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)和肥达试验,对85例确诊为伤寒热的患者、11例副伤寒热患者、101例发热性非伤寒患者以及130名健康受试者的血清样本进行了伤寒沙门氏菌脂多糖(LPS)特异性免疫球蛋白G(IgG)、IgA和IgM抗体检测。伤寒患者中,这三类抗伤寒沙门氏菌LPS免疫球蛋白的水平均高于健康或发热性非伤寒组;我们选取了这三类免疫球蛋白之间的各种组合,以获得灵敏度和特异性的最佳组合。ELISA检测中IgG + IgA + IgM(sigma lgs)的吸光度值总和是伤寒热诊断效用的最佳选择。我们选择sigma lgs≥1.2作为阳性检测判定水平,其灵敏度为94%,特异性为92%,假阴性率为5.9%。健康对照的假阳性率为7.7%,发热性非伤寒组的假阳性率为7.9%。我们还比较了ELISA和肥达试验诊断效用的受试者(或相对)操作特征(ROC)曲线,并讨论了肥达试验的优缺点,尤其是在流行地区的情况。ELISA检测比肥达试验的任何组合都更灵敏、更具特异性,因此它可以作为一种有用的工具,通过采集单一血样对伤寒热进行血清学诊断。