Freidank H M, Vögele H, Eckert K
Institut für Medizinische Mikrobiologie und Hygiene, Universitätsklinik Freiburg, Germany.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1997 Sep;16(9):685-8. doi: 10.1007/BF01708561.
A new commercial test for chlamydial serology, the MRL-Micro-Immunofluorescent Test (MRL; MRL Diagnostics, USA) was compared with the standard microimmunofluorescence test (MIF) using sera from 246 patients. Chlamydia pneumoniae immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibodies were detected in 46.3% (MIF) and 64.2% (MRL) of sera and Chlamydia trachomatis IgG in 23.2% (MIF) and 25.2% (MRL); Chlamydia psittaci IgG antibodies were found with the MRL in 1% of the sera from a general population and in 17.3% of preselected sera with elevated complement fixation titers. Titers were usually higher with the MRL. IgG titers of > or = 1:512 were detected in only 2% of sera using the standard MIF but in 30% using the MRL. In 16 sera from three Chlamydia pneumoniae culture-positive patients, the diagnosis of acute infection could be confirmed serologically in one with the MRL test but in none with the MIF test, indicating a higher sensitivity of the MRL.
一项针对衣原体血清学的新型商业检测方法——MRL微免疫荧光检测法（MRL；美国MRL诊断公司），与标准微免疫荧光检测法（MIF），使用来自246名患者的血清进行了比较。在46.3%（MIF）和64.2%（MRL）的血清中检测到肺炎衣原体免疫球蛋白G（IgG）抗体，在23.2%（MIF）和25.2%（MRL）的血清中检测到沙眼衣原体IgG；在普通人群1%的血清以及17.3%预先选定的补体结合滴度升高的血清中，使用MRL检测到鹦鹉热衣原体IgG抗体。通常MRL检测的滴度更高。使用标准MIF仅在2%的血清中检测到IgG滴度≥1:512，但使用MRL检测时这一比例为30%。在来自3名肺炎衣原体培养阳性患者的16份血清中，MRL检测法能在1例中通过血清学确诊急性感染，而MIF检测法无一例能确诊，这表明MRL具有更高的敏感性。
