George D A, Hui L L, Rattehalli D, Lovatt T, Perry I, Green M, Robinson K, Walters J R F, Brookes M J
Department of Gastroenterology, New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton, UK.
Department of Gastroenterology, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Frontline Gastroenterol. 2014 Jan;5(1):20-25. doi: 10.1136/flgastro-2013-100342. Epub 2013 Sep 3.
This pilot study was undertaken to assess the validity and effectiveness of near-patient coeliac immunological testing, compared to standard laboratory immunological techniques, used in the context of dietician-led coeliac disease follow-up clinics.
The study was designed in two phases, each assessing the near-patient test and standard laboratory immunological techniques. Phase 1 analysed stored serum samples; Phase 2 analysed whole blood from patients attending the dietician-led coeliac disease clinics.
Patients were recruited from New Cross Hospital, Wolverhampton (n=50), and Imperial College London (n=30), between March 2010 and February 2011.
Those with a diagnosis of coeliac disease for greater than 12 months attending dietician-led coeliac disease clinics.
In addition to whole blood taken for routine analysis, patients required a capillary finger-prick blood sample.
To determine if the whole blood and serum near-patient test results were in correlation with outcomes of standard laboratory evaluation.
Phase 1 demonstrated that the near-patient serum test had a sensitivity of 93.5% (95% CI 0.79% to 0.98%), specificity of 94.9% (0.83% to 0.99%), when compared to standard laboratory ELISA. Phase 2, involving patients whole blood, had a sensitivity of 77.8% (0.45% to 0.93%), and specificity of 100% (0.94% to 1%).
This pilot study has demonstrated that there appears to be a role for near-patient testing in coeliac disease, but further studies are recommended.
开展这项初步研究,以评估在营养师主导的乳糜泻随访诊所中,与标准实验室免疫技术相比,即时检验乳糜泻免疫检测的有效性和准确性。
该研究分两个阶段进行,每个阶段均对即时检验和标准实验室免疫技术进行评估。第一阶段分析储存的血清样本;第二阶段分析在营养师主导的乳糜泻诊所就诊患者的全血。
2010年3月至2011年2月期间,从伍尔弗汉普顿的新十字医院(n = 50)和伦敦帝国学院(n = 30)招募患者。
确诊乳糜泻超过12个月且在营养师主导的乳糜泻诊所就诊的患者。
除采集用于常规分析的全血外,患者还需采集毛细血管指尖血样本。
确定全血和血清即时检验结果是否与标准实验室评估结果相关。
第一阶段表明,与标准实验室酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)相比,即时检验血清检测的灵敏度为93.5%(95%置信区间为0.79%至0.98%),特异性为94.9%(0.83%至0.99%)。第二阶段涉及患者全血,灵敏度为77.8%(0.45%至0.93%),特异性为100%(0.94%至1%)。
这项初步研究表明,即时检验在乳糜泻检测中似乎有一定作用,但建议进一步开展研究。