Yohannes M, Gill J P S, Ghatak S, Singh D K, Tolosa T
School of Veterinary Medicine, Jimma University, College of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine, P.O. Box 307, Jimma, Ethiopia.
Rev Sci Tech. 2012 Dec;31(3):979-84. doi: 10.20506/rst.31.3.2175.
In this study, 241 serum samples from individuals exposed to brucellosis were subjected to the Rose Bengal plate test (RBPT); the titre was estimated by standard tube agglutination test (STAT), with positive > or = 80 IU/ml. Randomly selected sera (n = 81) were analysed by complement fixation test (CFT): titre > or = 1:4 was considered positive. Of 241 sera subjected to RBPT and STAT, 177 were negative in both tests; 5 samples tested negative by RBPT but positive by STAT. None was positive by RBPT and negative by STAT. Of 81 sera subjected to CFT, 23 (28.4%) were positive. Both RBPT and CFT found 18 samples positive; 5 samples were positive by CFT and negative by RBPT. Comparison of STAT with CFT showed 13 samples positive by STAT but negative by CFT, and 4 positive by CFT but negative by STAT. The sensitivity and specificity of STAT were 82.6% and 77.6%, respectively, with CFT as gold standard. No test is perfect, and the clinical history coupled with a combination of two or more tests will reduce diagnostic errors.
在本研究中,对241份布鲁氏菌病暴露个体的血清样本进行了玫瑰红平板试验(RBPT);通过标准试管凝集试验(STAT)测定滴度,阳性标准为≥80 IU/ml。随机选取血清样本(n = 81)进行补体结合试验(CFT)分析:滴度≥1:4被视为阳性。在241份接受RBPT和STAT检测的血清中,177份在两项检测中均为阴性;5份样本RBPT检测为阴性但STAT检测为阳性。没有样本RBPT检测为阳性而STAT检测为阴性。在81份接受CFT检测的血清中,23份(28.4%)为阳性。RBPT和CFT均检测出18份样本为阳性;5份样本CFT检测为阳性但RBPT检测为阴性。将STAT与CFT进行比较,发现13份样本STAT检测为阳性但CFT检测为阴性,4份样本CFT检测为阳性但STAT检测为阴性。以CFT作为金标准,STAT的敏感性和特异性分别为82.6%和77.6%。没有一种检测是完美的,结合临床病史并采用两种或更多检测方法将减少诊断错误。