中华器官移植杂志
中華器官移植雜誌
중화기관이식잡지
CHINESE JOURNAL OF ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION
2010年
3期
173-176
,共4页
黄伟%陈知水%张伟杰%程敦秀%汪芯%王大卫%周平
黃偉%陳知水%張偉傑%程敦秀%汪芯%王大衛%週平
황위%진지수%장위걸%정돈수%왕심%왕대위%주평
流式细胞术%酶联免疫吸附测定%群体反应性抗体
流式細胞術%酶聯免疫吸附測定%群體反應性抗體
류식세포술%매련면역흡부측정%군체반응성항체
Flow cytometry%Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay%PRA
目的 比较流式细胞术检测群体反应性抗体(FLOW-PRA)的方法与传统的酶联免疫吸附检测群体反应性抗体(ELIA-PRA)的方法在临床器官移植中应用的相关性、灵敏性、准确性及实用性.方法 采用FLOW-PRA和ELISA-PRA两种方法对212份等待肾移植患者的血清进行检测,对两种方法的检出结果进行比较分析.结果 FLOW-PRA和ELISA-PRA两种方法各耗时1.5h和3 h.两种方法所得结果有很好的相关性,PRA Ⅰ类和PRAⅡ类检测结果的相关系数分别为0.94和0.89.采用FLOW-PRA法检出PRA Ⅰ类和Ⅱ类阳性率分别为24.5%和18.4%,采用ELISA-PRA法检出PRAⅠ类和Ⅱ类的阳性率分别为17.9%和14.6%,FIOW-PRA法的阳性检出率明显高于ELISA-PRA法.FLOW-PRA法能准确检测到低浓度抗体及其抗体特异性.结论 与ELISA-PRA法相比.FLOW-PRA法简单快捷,有更高的敏感性和准确性,对低致敏患者有更高的阳性检出率,更适合临床器官移植对PRA的检测.
目的 比較流式細胞術檢測群體反應性抗體(FLOW-PRA)的方法與傳統的酶聯免疫吸附檢測群體反應性抗體(ELIA-PRA)的方法在臨床器官移植中應用的相關性、靈敏性、準確性及實用性.方法 採用FLOW-PRA和ELISA-PRA兩種方法對212份等待腎移植患者的血清進行檢測,對兩種方法的檢齣結果進行比較分析.結果 FLOW-PRA和ELISA-PRA兩種方法各耗時1.5h和3 h.兩種方法所得結果有很好的相關性,PRA Ⅰ類和PRAⅡ類檢測結果的相關繫數分彆為0.94和0.89.採用FLOW-PRA法檢齣PRA Ⅰ類和Ⅱ類暘性率分彆為24.5%和18.4%,採用ELISA-PRA法檢齣PRAⅠ類和Ⅱ類的暘性率分彆為17.9%和14.6%,FIOW-PRA法的暘性檢齣率明顯高于ELISA-PRA法.FLOW-PRA法能準確檢測到低濃度抗體及其抗體特異性.結論 與ELISA-PRA法相比.FLOW-PRA法簡單快捷,有更高的敏感性和準確性,對低緻敏患者有更高的暘性檢齣率,更適閤臨床器官移植對PRA的檢測.
목적 비교류식세포술검측군체반응성항체(FLOW-PRA)적방법여전통적매련면역흡부검측군체반응성항체(ELIA-PRA)적방법재림상기관이식중응용적상관성、령민성、준학성급실용성.방법 채용FLOW-PRA화ELISA-PRA량충방법대212빈등대신이식환자적혈청진행검측,대량충방법적검출결과진행비교분석.결과 FLOW-PRA화ELISA-PRA량충방법각모시1.5h화3 h.량충방법소득결과유흔호적상관성,PRA Ⅰ류화PRAⅡ류검측결과적상관계수분별위0.94화0.89.채용FLOW-PRA법검출PRA Ⅰ류화Ⅱ류양성솔분별위24.5%화18.4%,채용ELISA-PRA법검출PRAⅠ류화Ⅱ류적양성솔분별위17.9%화14.6%,FIOW-PRA법적양성검출솔명현고우ELISA-PRA법.FLOW-PRA법능준학검측도저농도항체급기항체특이성.결론 여ELISA-PRA법상비.FLOW-PRA법간단쾌첩,유경고적민감성화준학성,대저치민환자유경고적양성검출솔,경괄합림상기관이식대PRA적검측.
Objective To apply flow cytometry-panel reactive antibody (FLOW-PRA) and compare the application of traditional (enzyme-linked imrnunosorbent assay) ELISA-PRA in clinical organ transplantarion,so as to evaluate the concordance,sensitivity,accuracy and practicability of FLOW-PRA.Methods PRA was detected in 212 serum samples from 185 patients awaiting organ transplantation using FLOW-PRA and ELISA-PRA.Results It took 1.5 h and 3 h for FLOW-PRA vs ELISA-PRA.Concordance correlation coefficient for the results of the two methods was 94% (class Ⅰ)and 89% (class Ⅱ),respectively.Of all sera,24.5% (in comparison to ELISA-PRA,P<0.005)were class I positive,18.4% (P<0.05) class Ⅱ positive by flow cytometry,and 17.9% and 14.6% by ELISA,respectively.The positive incidence in Flow group was higher than in ELISA group.Low titer of antibodies was detected positively only by flow eytometry,furthermore,the antigen specificity of PRA could only be discriminated by FLOW-PRA.Conclusion Flow cytometry is more sensitive and more accurate than ELISA in PRA detection.FLOW-PRA is easy to operate and time-effective,and suitable for clinical application.
