Bond R, Thorogood S C, Lloyd D H
Department of Small Animal Medicine and Surgery, Royal Veterinary College, North Mymms, Hatfield, Hertfordshire.
Vet Rec. 1994 Aug 6;135(6):130-3. doi: 10.1136/vr.135.6.130.
Serum samples from 10 dogs without skin disease, 10 with non-atopic pruritic skin disease, and 10 atopic dogs were tested blind by using two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAS) (Veterinary Allergy Test Kit; All-Vet [test A] and Elisarest; Bloxham Laboratories [test B]) designed to detect immunoglobulin E antibodies to environmental allergens. All the dogs tested had at least three positive reactions when using test A, and 28 of the dogs had at least one positive reaction when using test B. The median numbers of positive reactions observed in the three groups of dogs were not significantly different for each test. Significantly more reactions were observed with test A in each group (P < 0.001) than with test B. The sensitivity of both the tests was 100 per cent, but the specificity of test A was 0 per cent and the specificity of test B was 10 per cent. The positive predictive values of tests A and B were 33.3 per cent and 35.7 per cent, respectively, and the negative predictive values were 0 and 100 per cent. The poor specificities and low positive predictive values indicate that the positive results obtained when using these ELISAS are of no diagnostic value in canine atopy.
采用两种酶联免疫吸附测定（ELISA）（兽医过敏检测试剂盒；All-Vet [检测A]和Elisarest；布洛克斯汉姆实验室[检测B]）对10只无皮肤疾病的犬、10只患有非特应性瘙痒性皮肤病的犬和10只特应性犬的血清样本进行盲法检测，这两种检测旨在检测针对环境过敏原的免疫球蛋白E抗体。使用检测A时，所有受试犬至少有3次阳性反应，使用检测B时，28只犬至少有1次阳性反应。每组犬中观察到的阳性反应中位数在每项检测中无显著差异。与检测B相比，每组中检测A观察到的反应显著更多（P < 0.001）。两种检测的敏感性均为100%，但检测A的特异性为0%，检测B的特异性为10%。检测A和检测B的阳性预测值分别为33.3%和35.7%，阴性预测值分别为0和100%。特异性差和阳性预测值低表明，使用这些ELISA获得的阳性结果对犬特应性皮炎没有诊断价值。
