论文部分内容阅读
目的:对男性尿道炎患者进行麻醉法和经典法采样,比较两组尿道分泌物中的衣原体检测毕果。方法:随机选取我院收治的186例男性尿道炎患者,将两组患者分为对照组和实验组,对照组患者采用经典法采集尿道分泌物,实验组患者采用麻醉法采集尿道分泌物,使用免疫层析法,检测分泌物中的衣原体阳性率,并向两组阳性对照液中分别加入不同体积的利多卡因溶液,静置一段时间后,观察利多卡因溶液对衣原体阳性率检测结果的影响。结果:两组患者分泌物中检测的衣原体阳性率相同,加利多卡因溶液的体积为150μL时,对阳性对照液的影响较大,当利多卡因溶液的体积<150μL时,两组阳性溶液的变化没有明显差别,因此利多卡因小于150μL时对衣原体抗原阳性的检测无明显影响。结论:使用经典法取样和麻醉法取样检测尿道炎衣原体阳性率结果无明显区别,但使用麻醉法取样可显著减轻患者的痛苦,因此,在临床治疗上,使用麻醉法取样的效果要优于经典取样法。
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic value of chlamydia in urethral secretions between male and female urethritis patients by the method of anesthesia and classical method. Methods: A total of 186 male urethritis patients admitted to our hospital were selected randomly. The two groups of patients were divided into control group and experimental group. Urinary tract secretions were collected by the classic method in the control group. Urethral secretions were collected by anesthesia in the experimental group. Immunochromatography, detection of secretions in the positive rate of Chlamydia, positive control solution and the two groups were added to different volumes of lidocaine solution, after standing for a period of time, the lidocaine solution was observed positive rate of detection of chlamydia influences. Results: The positive rate of Chlamydia detected in the secretions of the two groups was the same. When the volume of the lidocaine solution was 150 μL, the positive control solution had a great effect. When the volume of the lidocaine solution was less than 150 μL, the two positive solutions There was no significant difference between the changes, so lidocaine less than 150μL when tested positive for Chlamydia antigen had no significant effect. CONCLUSIONS: There is no significant difference between the classical sampling method and the anesthetic sampling method in detecting the positive rate of Chlamydia urethritis. However, sampling with anesthesia can significantly reduce the patient’s pain. Therefore, in clinical treatment, sampling with anesthesia is better than classic Sampling method.