论文部分内容阅读
目的 分析抗线粒体抗体 (AMA)阴性的原发性胆汁性肝硬化 (PBC)患者与AMA阳性PBC患者在临床症状、实验室诊断指标等方面的差异 ;对比用克隆表达的人源M2抗原建立的酶联免疫吸附试验 (ELISA)法测定M2抗体 ,与经典的间接免疫荧光法测定AMA的敏感性高低。方法 测定 6 3例PBC患者外周血中的AMA与M2抗体。结果 AMA在 6 3例PBC患者中的阳性率为81% ,而M2抗体为 10 0 % ;AMA阴性的PBC患者抗核抗体 (ANA)、抗平滑肌抗体 (ASMA)的阳性率高于AMA阳性的PBC患者 ,但在临床症状和其他实验室诊断标准上差异并无显著性。结论 酶联免疫吸附试验 (ELISA)法检测M2抗体的敏感性高于间接免疫荧光法测定AMA ,PBC患者外周血中AMA的阳性与否和疾病并无明显关联
OBJECTIVE: To analyze differences in the clinical symptoms and laboratory diagnostic criteria between anti-mitochondrial antibody (AMA) negative primary biliary cirrhosis (PBC) patients and AMA positive PBC patients. M2 antibody was detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and the sensitivity of AMA was determined by classical indirect immunofluorescence assay. Methods The AMA and M2 antibodies in peripheral blood of 63 PBC patients were determined. Results The positive rate of AMA was 81% in 63 PBC patients and 100% in M2 antibody. The positive rate of anti-ANA and ASMA in AMA-negative PBC patients was higher than that in AMA-positive patients PBC patients, but no significant difference in clinical symptoms and other laboratory diagnostic criteria. Conclusions The sensitivity of ELISA for detection of M2 antibody is higher than that of indirect immunofluorescence assay for the determination of AMA in peripheral blood of patients with ABC or PBC