Suppr超能文献

抗核抗体检测方法的比较:免疫荧光法与酶免疫法。

Comparison of antinuclear antibody testing methods: immunofluorescence assay versus enzyme immunoassay.

作者信息

Gniewek R A, Stites D P, McHugh T M, Hilton J F, Nakagawa M

机构信息

Bio-Rad Laboratories, Hercules, California 94547, USA.

出版信息

Clin Diagn Lab Immunol. 1997 Mar;4(2):185-8. doi: 10.1128/cdli.4.2.185-188.1997.

Abstract

Performances of anti-nuclear antibody testing by immunofluorescence assay (ANA-IFA) and enzyme immunoassay (ANA-EIA) were compared in relation to patient diagnosis. A total of 467 patient serum samples were tested by ANA-IFA (Kallestad; Sanofi) and ANA-EIA (RADIAS; Bio-Rad), and their age, sex, diagnosis, disease status, and medications were obtained through chart review. Reference ranges were established by testing 98 healthy blood donor samples. Eighty-six samples came from patients with diffuse connective tissue diseases, including systemic lupus erythematosus, discoid lupus erythematosus, or drug-induced lupus (n = 71); systemic sclerosis, CREST syndrome (calcinosis, Raynaud's phenomenon, esophageal motility abnormalities, sclerodactyly, and telangiectasia), or Raynaud's syndrome (n = 8); Sjögren's syndrome (n = 5); mixed connective tissue disease (n = 5); and polymyositis or dermatomyositis (n = 3). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for ANA-IFA were 87.2, 48.0, 29.1, and 93.9%, respectively, for the reference range of < 1:160. For ANA-EIA, they were 90.7, 60.2, 35.8, and 96.4%, respectively, for the reference range of < 0.9. ANA-EIA offers equivalent sensitivity and higher specificity compared to ANA-IFA.

摘要

比较了免疫荧光法(ANA-IFA)和酶免疫法(ANA-EIA)检测抗核抗体在患者诊断方面的性能。共对467份患者血清样本进行了ANA-IFA(Kallestad;赛诺菲)和ANA-EIA(RADIAS;伯乐)检测,并通过查阅病历获取了患者的年龄、性别、诊断、疾病状态和用药情况。通过检测98份健康献血者样本建立了参考范围。86份样本来自弥漫性结缔组织病患者,包括系统性红斑狼疮、盘状红斑狼疮或药物性狼疮(n = 71);系统性硬化症、CREST综合征(钙质沉着、雷诺现象、食管动力异常、指端硬化和毛细血管扩张)或雷诺综合征(n = 8);干燥综合征(n = 5);混合性结缔组织病(n = 5);以及多发性肌炎或皮肌炎(n = 3)。对于ANA-IFA,当参考范围<1:160时,敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为87.2%、48.0%、29.1%和93.9%。对于ANA-EIA,当参考范围<0.9时,它们分别为90.7%、60.2%、35.8%和96.4%。与ANA-IFA相比,ANA-EIA具有相当的敏感性和更高的特异性。

相似文献

6
Clinicopathological evaluation of in vivo epidermal nuclear fluorescence.体内表皮细胞核荧光的临床病理评估
Clin Exp Dermatol. 2009 Apr;34(3):314-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2230.2008.02947.x. Epub 2008 Nov 24.
9
Screening for antinuclear antibodies by enzyme immunoassay.采用酶免疫测定法筛查抗核抗体。
Am J Clin Pathol. 1996 Apr;105(4):468-73. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/105.4.468.

引用本文的文献

3
Antinuclear antibody testing - misunderstood or misbegotten?抗核抗体检测——被误解还是被误用?
Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2017 Aug;13(8):495-502. doi: 10.1038/nrrheum.2017.74. Epub 2017 May 25.

本文引用的文献

2
Screening for antinuclear antibodies by enzyme immunoassay.采用酶免疫测定法筛查抗核抗体。
Am J Clin Pathol. 1996 Apr;105(4):468-73. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/105.4.468.
8

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验