Suppr超能文献

血小板抗体的检测:三种技术的比较。

Detection of platelet antibodies: a comparison of three techniques.

作者信息

Helmerhorst F M, Bossers B, de Bruin H G, Engelfriet C P, von dem Borne A E

出版信息

Vox Sang. 1980 Aug;39(2):83-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1423-0410.1980.tb01842.x.

Abstract

For the detection of auto-antibodies on the platelets and in the serum of patients with idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura, three new techniques have recently been developed: the quantitative antiglobulin consumption assay (QACA), the platelet radioactive antiglobulin test (PRAT) and the platelet suspension immunofluorescence test (PSIFT). The results obtained by various investigators with these techniques differ considerably. We, therefore, studied the sensitivity of the three methods. This was done by testing platelet-reactive allo-antibodies (anti-Zwa, anti-HLA-A2) and auto-antibodies in titration. The results show that the PSIFT is the most sensitive technique, closely followed by the PRAT. The QACA was found to be much less sensitive than the other two methods. This suggests that a positive result in the QACA and a negative result in the PSIFT and/or PRAT cannot be attributed to the presence of platelet auto-antibodies.

摘要

为检测特发性血小板减少性紫癜患者血小板及血清中的自身抗体,最近开发了三种新技术:定量抗球蛋白消耗试验(QACA)、血小板放射性抗球蛋白试验(PRAT)和血小板悬液免疫荧光试验(PSIFT)。不同研究者使用这些技术获得的结果差异很大。因此,我们研究了这三种方法的敏感性。通过滴定检测血小板反应性同种抗体(抗-Zwa、抗-HLA-A2)和自身抗体来完成此项研究。结果表明,PSIFT是最敏感的技术,PRAT紧随其后。发现QACA的敏感性远低于其他两种方法。这表明QACA呈阳性结果而PSIFT和/或PRAT呈阴性结果不能归因于血小板自身抗体的存在。

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