论文部分内容阅读
目的比较TP-ELISA、TP-PA、RPR 3种梅毒检测方法,为选择梅毒感染状况筛查方法提供依据。方法采用梅毒特异性抗体的双抗原夹心法(ELISA)进行抗体(包括IgM、IgG)检测,并与RPR法检测结果进行比较。3种方法检测结果有反应性的标本,再用TPPA法进行确证。结果ELISA-IgM法有反应性率2.28%(9/394),RPR法有反应性率3.30%(13/394),ELISA-IgG法有反应性率13.20%(52/394);ELISA法与TPPA法符合率97.9%(47/48),RPR法与TPPA符合率25%(12/48),IgM法与TPPA符合率14.58%(7/48)。ELISA法与RPR及IgM法差异有高度显著性。ELISA法与TPHA法差异无显著性。结论ELISA法能满足疾控机构监测的需要,可以在特殊人群梅毒感染状况检测中应用。
OBJECTIVE: To compare the detection methods of TP-ELISA, TP-PA and RPR in syphilis and provide the basis for selecting the screening method for syphilis infection. Methods Antibodies (including IgM, IgG) were detected by double antigen sandwich method (ELISA) of syphilis specific antibody and compared with the results of RPR assay. Three methods test results were reactive specimens, and then confirmed by TPPA method. Results The reactivity rate was 2.28% (9/394) in the ELISA-IgM method, the reactivity rate was 3.30% (13/394) in the RPR method, and the reactivity rate was 13.20% (52/394) The coincidence rate of TPPA was 97.9% (47/48), the coincidence rate of RPR and TPPA was 25% (12/48), and the coincidence rate of IgM and TPPA was 14.58% (7/48). The difference between ELISA and RPR and IgM was highly significant. There was no significant difference between ELISA and TPHA. Conclusion ELISA can meet the needs of CDC surveillance and can be used in the detection of syphilis infection in special populations.