酶联免疫吸附试验与传统方法诊断地方性布鲁氏菌病的比较。
ELISA versus conventional methods of diagnosing endemic brucellosis.
机构信息
Department of Microbiology, Belgaum Institute of Medical Sciences, Belgaum, Karnataka, India.
出版信息
Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2010 Aug;83(2):314-8. doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.2010.09-0790.
The diagnostic value of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was evaluated when blood specimens of 92 patients suspected of brucellosis underwent the ELISA (IgM and IgG), standard tube agglutination (SAT), and 2-mercaptoethanol (2-ME) tests and blood cultures; 38 sera from non-brucellosis patients and 34 sera from blood donors were also subjected to ELISA, SAT, and 2-ME tests. SAT was able to pinpoint only 23 (25%), whereas ELISA confirmed the etiology in 56 (60.9%; P < 0.001) patients with brucellosis, including 31 culture-confirmed cases. The sensitivity and specificity of ELISA were 100% and 71.31%, respectively. Because they were confirmed by ELISA, the diagnosis could never be excluded with SAT in 33 cases. ELISA has been found to be more sensitive in acute (28% higher sensitivity; P < 0.02) and chronic (55% higher sensitivity; P < 0.01) cases. For accurate diagnosis in suspected brucellosis cases detection, we recommend both ELISA IgM and IgG tests. ELISA IgG and 2-ME tests seem to be promising tools in judging prognosis.
当对 92 例疑似布鲁氏菌病患者的血液标本进行酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）（IgM 和 IgG）、标准试管凝集试验（SAT）和 2-巯基乙醇（2-ME）检测以及血液培养后，评估了酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）的诊断价值；还对 38 例非布鲁氏菌病患者和 34 例献血者的血清进行了 ELISA、SAT 和 2-ME 检测。SAT 只能确定 23 例（25%），而 ELISA 则在 56 例（60.9%；P<0.001）布鲁氏菌病患者中证实了病因，包括 31 例培养确诊病例。ELISA 的敏感性和特异性分别为 100%和 71.31%。由于它们被 ELISA 证实，因此在 33 例中 SAT 永远不能排除诊断。ELISA 在急性（敏感性提高 28%；P<0.02）和慢性（敏感性提高 55%；P<0.01）病例中更敏感。为了在疑似布鲁氏菌病病例检测中进行准确诊断，我们建议同时进行 ELISA IgM 和 IgG 检测。ELISA IgG 和 2-ME 检测似乎是判断预后的有前途的工具。
Zotero 插件