Li Zhiyan, Feng Zhenru, Liu Ping, Yan Cunling
Department of Clinical Laboratory, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China
Department of Clinical Laboratory, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, China.
Ann Clin Biochem. 2016 Sep;53(Pt 5):588-92. doi: 10.1177/0004563215623806. Epub 2015 Dec 17.
Traditionally, testing for syphilis has consisted of initial screening with a non-treponemal test, then retesting reactive specimens with a treponemal test. Recent availability of a chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay for detecting antibodies against Treponema pallidum has led several laboratories in China to adopt chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay for screening of syphilis, with subsequent testing of reactive serum samples with non-treponemal tests. We evaluated the utility of chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay for routine screening of syphilis.
Antibodies against Treponema pallidum were screened in 20,550 serum samples using chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay. Chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-positive samples were reflexively tested with rapid plasma reagin tests and Treponema pallidum particle agglutination assays. Dot-immunoblot assays were used to confirm results of chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-positive and Treponema pallidum particle agglutination-negative serum samples.
Overall, 267 samples (1.3%) were chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-positive, and 185 (69.3%) of those chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-positive serum samples were also Treponema pallidum particle agglutination-positive. Samples' signal to cut-off ratio for chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay correlated with diagnostic reliability, as greater samples' signal to cut-off ratio corresponded with greater concordance between chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay and Treponema pallidum particle agglutination results. Dot-immunoblot testing of 82 chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay-positive and Treponema pallidum particle agglutination-negative serum samples showed that 16 samples (19.5%) were Dot-immunoblot-positive, 28 (34.2%) were indeterminate and 38 (46.3%) were negative.
Because there is a certain percentage of false-positive results using chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay for routine screening of syphilis, further analysis by Treponema pallidum particle agglutination is recommended to confirm diagnostic results. While in screening populations discrepancies between chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay and Treponema pallidum particle agglutination results are quite prevalent, confirmation by immunoblot assay may be useful.
传统上,梅毒检测包括先用非梅毒螺旋体试验进行初步筛查,然后用梅毒螺旋体试验对反应性标本进行复检。最近,一种用于检测抗梅毒螺旋体抗体的化学发光微粒免疫分析法在中国的几个实验室得到应用,这些实验室采用化学发光微粒免疫分析法进行梅毒筛查,随后用非梅毒螺旋体试验对反应性血清样本进行检测。我们评估了化学发光微粒免疫分析法在梅毒常规筛查中的实用性。
使用化学发光微粒免疫分析法对20550份血清样本进行抗梅毒螺旋体抗体筛查。对化学发光微粒免疫分析法呈阳性的样本,用快速血浆反应素试验和梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验进行复检。采用斑点免疫印迹法对化学发光微粒免疫分析法呈阳性且梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验呈阴性的血清样本结果进行确认。
总体而言,267份样本(1.3%)化学发光微粒免疫分析法呈阳性,其中185份(69.3%)化学发光微粒免疫分析法呈阳性的血清样本梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验也呈阳性。化学发光微粒免疫分析法的样本信号截断比与诊断可靠性相关,样本信号截断比越高,化学发光微粒免疫分析法与梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验结果的一致性越高。对82份化学发光微粒免疫分析法呈阳性且梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验呈阴性的血清样本进行斑点免疫印迹检测,结果显示16份样本(19.5%)斑点免疫印迹呈阳性,28份(34.2%)结果不确定,38份(46.3%)呈阴性。
由于使用化学发光微粒免疫分析法进行梅毒常规筛查存在一定比例的假阳性结果,建议采用梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验进行进一步分析以确认诊断结果。虽然在筛查人群中,化学发光微粒免疫分析法与梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验结果之间的差异相当普遍,但免疫印迹法进行确认可能会有帮助。