Forsey T, Stainsby K, Hoger P H, Ridgway G L, Darougar S, Fischer-Brugge U
Eur J Epidemiol. 1986 Jun;2(2):163-4. doi: 10.1007/BF00157029.
Two immunofluorescence tests were compared for detecting antibodies to chlamydiae. The inclusion antigen test was more sensitive, detecting antibodies in more sera and at higher titres. The micro-IF test was more specific, differentiating between antibodies to C. trachomatis and those to C.IOL 207. Antibodies to this non-genital chlamydial type accounted for half the positive results. These antibodies can cause the prevalence of C. trachomatis infections to be over estimated when genus-specific serology tests are used.
比较了两种免疫荧光试验检测衣原体抗体的效果。包涵体抗原试验更敏感,能在更多血清中检测到抗体,且抗体滴度更高。微量免疫荧光试验更具特异性,能区分沙眼衣原体抗体和鹦鹉热衣原体IOL 207抗体。针对这种非生殖道衣原体类型的抗体占阳性结果的一半。当使用属特异性血清学检测时,这些抗体会导致沙眼衣原体感染的流行率被高估。