通过肥达氏反应和间接荧光抗体（IFA）试验检测伤寒热。一项对比研究。

Detection of typhoid fever by Widal and indirect fluorescent antibody (IFA) tests. A comparative study.

作者信息

Rai G P, Zachariah K, Shrivastava S

机构信息

Division of Microbiology, Defence Research and Development Establishment, Gwalior, India.

出版信息

J Hyg Epidemiol Microbiol Immunol. 1989;33(3):331-6.

PMID:2478615

Abstract

Widal test is a conventional method for the detection of typhoid fever. However, it takes 18-24 hours to complete the test. In the present study indirect fluorescent antibody test has been compared with the Widal test using single serum specimens and was found to be rapid, sensitive and specific. Serum specimens from 41 culture proven cases of typhoid fever, 14 clinically suspected cases and 22 normal individuals were collected. Whereas Widal test detected 63.41% positive cases, IFA test detected 87.80% from among culturally proven typhoid cases. Among the clinically suspected cases of typhoid fever, IFA test detected 85.71% (28.57 + 57.14%) while Widal test detected only 57.13% (35.71 + 21.42%) positive cases out of above 14 cases.

摘要

肥达氏试验是检测伤寒热的传统方法。然而，完成该试验需要18至24小时。在本研究中，使用单份血清标本将间接荧光抗体试验与肥达氏试验进行了比较，发现前者快速、灵敏且特异。收集了41例经培养证实的伤寒热病例、14例临床疑似病例和22名正常个体的血清标本。肥达氏试验检测出63.41%的阳性病例，而间接荧光抗体试验在经培养证实的伤寒病例中检测出87.80%的阳性病例。在临床疑似伤寒热病例中，间接荧光抗体试验检测出85.71%（28.57 + 57.14%）的阳性病例，而在上述14例病例中，肥达氏试验仅检测出57.13%（35.71 + 21.42%）的阳性病例。