Suppr超能文献

自动化胶乳凝集快速血浆反应素试验在梅毒诊断和疗效评估中的应用:与手动卡片试验的前瞻性队列研究比较。

Usefulness of Automated Latex Turbidimetric Rapid Plasma Reagin Test for Diagnosis and Evaluation of Treatment Response in Syphilis in Comparison with Manual Card Test: a Prospective Cohort Study.

机构信息

AIDS Clinical Center, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.

AIDS Clinical Center, National Center for Global Health and Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Oct 25;56(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01003-18. Print 2018 Nov.

Abstract

The usefulness of an automated latex turbidimetric rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assay, compared to the conventional manual card test (serial 2-fold dilution method), for the diagnosis of syphilis and evaluation of treatment response remains unknown. We conducted (i) a cross-sectional study and (ii) a prospective cohort study to elucidate the correlation between automated and manual tests and whether a 4-fold decrement is a feasible criterion for successful treatment with the automated test, respectively, in HIV-infected patients, from October 2015 to November 2017. Study i included 518 patients. The results showed strong correlation between the two tests ( = 0.931; < 0.001). With a manual test titer of ≥1:8 plus a positive particle agglutination (TPPA) test as the reference standard for diagnosis, the optimal cutoff value for the automated test was 6.0 RPR units (area under the curve [AUC], 0.998), with positive predictive value (PPV) of 92.5% and negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.4%. Study ii enrolled 66 men with syphilis. Their RPR values were followed up until after 12 months of treatment. At 12 months, 77.3% and 78.8% of the patients achieved a 4-fold decrement in RPR titer by the automated and manual test, respectively. The optimal decrement rate in RPR titer by the automated test for a 4-fold decrement by manual card test was 76.54% (AUC, 0.96) (PPV, 96.1%; NPV, 80.0%). The automated RPR test is a good alternative to the manual test for the diagnosis of syphilis and evaluation of treatment response and is more rapid and can handle more specimens than the manual test without interpersonal variation in interpretation.

摘要

自动化胶乳凝集快速血浆反应素(RPR)检测与传统的手动卡片检测(系列 2 倍稀释法)相比,用于诊断梅毒和评估治疗反应的效果尚不清楚。我们分别进行了(i) 横断面研究和(ii) 前瞻性队列研究,以阐明在 HIV 感染患者中,自动化检测与手动检测之间的相关性,以及自动化检测中 4 倍滴度下降是否是治疗成功的可行标准。这些研究在 2015 年 10 月至 2017 年 11 月期间进行。研究 i 纳入了 518 例患者。结果表明,两种检测方法具有很强的相关性( = 0.931; < 0.001)。以手动检测滴度≥1:8 且阳性颗粒凝集(TPPA)检测为诊断参考标准,自动化检测的最佳截断值为 6.0 RPR 单位(曲线下面积[AUC],0.998),阳性预测值(PPV)为 92.5%,阴性预测值(NPV)为 99.4%。研究 ii 纳入了 66 例梅毒男性患者。他们的 RPR 值一直随访到治疗 12 个月后。在 12 个月时,自动化和手动检测分别有 77.3%和 78.8%的患者实现了 RPR 滴度的 4 倍下降。对于手动卡片检测的 4 倍下降,自动化 RPR 检测的最佳滴度下降率为 76.54%(AUC,0.96)(PPV,96.1%;NPV,80.0%)。自动化 RPR 检测是一种替代手动检测诊断梅毒和评估治疗反应的良好方法,它比手动检测更快速,并且可以处理更多的标本,而不会因解释方面的人为差异而产生变化。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验