Doern G V, Coughlin R T, Wu L
Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester.
J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Aug;30(8):2042-6. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.8.2042-2046.1992.
A total of 320 stool specimens obtained from 262 patients suspected of having Clostridium difficile-associated gastrointestinal disease were examined with two cytotoxicity assays (CTAs) and two commercially available enzyme immunoassays (EIAs). The CTAs were an in-house-developed procedure (University of Massachusetts Medical Center [UMMC], Worcester, Mass.) and a commercial test (Bartels CTA; Baxter Healthcare Corp., West Sacramento, Calif.). One EIA was a monoclonal antibody-based assay for C. difficile toxins A and B (Cambridge Biotech Corp. [CBC], Worcester, Mass.). The other EIA employed monoclonal antibodies directed against only toxin A (Meridian Diagnostics, Cincinnati, Ohio). True-positive and true-negative results were defined on the basis of the results of the four assays, clinical assessments of patients, and the results of other laboratory tests. The sensitivities of the four assays were as follows: Bartels CTA, 100%; UMMC CTA, 97.2%; CBC EIA, 84.5%; and Meridian EIA, 69.0%. The Bartels CTA demonstrated a specificity of 99.2%. The other three assays had a specificity of 100%.
从262名疑似患有艰难梭菌相关性胃肠疾病的患者中获取了320份粪便标本,采用两种细胞毒性试验(CTA)和两种市售酶免疫测定法(EIA)进行检测。CTA分别是一种内部研发的方法(马萨诸塞大学医学中心[UMMC],伍斯特,马萨诸塞州)和一种商业检测方法(巴特尔氏CTA;百特医疗保健公司,西萨克拉门托,加利福尼亚州)。一种EIA是基于单克隆抗体的艰难梭菌毒素A和B检测方法(剑桥生物技术公司[CBC],伍斯特,马萨诸塞州)。另一种EIA采用仅针对毒素A的单克隆抗体(子午线诊断公司,辛辛那提,俄亥俄州)。根据这四种检测方法的结果、患者的临床评估以及其他实验室检测结果来定义真阳性和真阴性结果。四种检测方法的敏感性如下:巴特尔氏CTA为100%;UMMC CTA为97.2%;CBC EIA为84.5%;子午线EIA为69.0%。巴特尔氏CTA的特异性为99.2%。其他三种检测方法的特异性为100%。