医药前沿
醫藥前沿
의약전연
YIAYAO QIANYAN
2013年
20期
63-65
,共3页
系统性红斑狼疮%抗核小体抗体%抗核抗体%抗ds-DNA抗体%抗Sm抗体
繫統性紅斑狼瘡%抗覈小體抗體%抗覈抗體%抗ds-DNA抗體%抗Sm抗體
계통성홍반랑창%항핵소체항체%항핵항체%항ds-DNA항체%항Sm항체
systemic lupus erythematosus anti-nucleosome antibody%anti-nuclear%antibodies%anti-dsDNA antibodies%anti-Smith antibodies
目的研究和评价血清抗核小体抗体(AnuA)在系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)诊断中的临床意义。方法用酶联免疫吸附(ELISA)方法检测50例SLE组患者、39例非SLE疾病对照组患者血清AnuA，同时用间接免疫荧光法检测患者血清抗核抗体(ANA)和抗双链(ds-DNA)抗体、酶免疫条带法检测其抗Sm抗体，进行统计学分析，评价抗核小体抗体在SLE诊断中的临床意义。结果 AnuA的敏感性和特异性分别为76.0%和98.6%，敏感性低于ANA (P﹤0.01)，高于抗ds-DNA抗体（P>0.05）、以及抗Sm抗体（P﹤0.01）；特异性高于ANA（P﹤0.01），与抗ds-DNA抗体相同（P>0.05），低于抗Sm抗体（P>0.05）；AnuA在抗ds-DNA抗体和抗Sm抗体阴性的SLE患者中检出的阳性率分别为47.6%和73.8%。结论抗核小体抗体对SLE的敏感性和特异性较高，与ANA、抗ds-DNA抗体和抗Sm抗体等自身抗体联合检测对SLE的诊断具有重要的临床意义和应用价值。
目的研究和評價血清抗覈小體抗體(AnuA)在繫統性紅斑狼瘡(SLE)診斷中的臨床意義。方法用酶聯免疫吸附(ELISA)方法檢測50例SLE組患者、39例非SLE疾病對照組患者血清AnuA，同時用間接免疫熒光法檢測患者血清抗覈抗體(ANA)和抗雙鏈(ds-DNA)抗體、酶免疫條帶法檢測其抗Sm抗體，進行統計學分析，評價抗覈小體抗體在SLE診斷中的臨床意義。結果 AnuA的敏感性和特異性分彆為76.0%和98.6%，敏感性低于ANA (P﹤0.01)，高于抗ds-DNA抗體（P>0.05）、以及抗Sm抗體（P﹤0.01）；特異性高于ANA（P﹤0.01），與抗ds-DNA抗體相同（P>0.05），低于抗Sm抗體（P>0.05）；AnuA在抗ds-DNA抗體和抗Sm抗體陰性的SLE患者中檢齣的暘性率分彆為47.6%和73.8%。結論抗覈小體抗體對SLE的敏感性和特異性較高，與ANA、抗ds-DNA抗體和抗Sm抗體等自身抗體聯閤檢測對SLE的診斷具有重要的臨床意義和應用價值。
목적연구화평개혈청항핵소체항체(AnuA)재계통성홍반랑창(SLE)진단중적림상의의。방법용매련면역흡부(ELISA)방법검측50례SLE조환자、39례비SLE질병대조조환자혈청AnuA，동시용간접면역형광법검측환자혈청항핵항체(ANA)화항쌍련(ds-DNA)항체、매면역조대법검측기항Sm항체，진행통계학분석，평개항핵소체항체재SLE진단중적림상의의。결과 AnuA적민감성화특이성분별위76.0%화98.6%，민감성저우ANA (P﹤0.01)，고우항ds-DNA항체（P>0.05）、이급항Sm항체（P﹤0.01）；특이성고우ANA（P﹤0.01），여항ds-DNA항체상동（P>0.05），저우항Sm항체（P>0.05）；AnuA재항ds-DNA항체화항Sm항체음성적SLE환자중검출적양성솔분별위47.6%화73.8%。결론항핵소체항체대SLE적민감성화특이성교고，여ANA、항ds-DNA항체화항Sm항체등자신항체연합검측대SLE적진단구유중요적림상의의화응용개치。
Object: To investigate and evaluate the clinical significance of anti-nucleosome antibodies(AnuA) in diagnosing systemic lupus erythematosus(SLE). Methods: The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to measure the AnuA in serum of 50 SLE patients, 39 patients with other rheumatic diseases. At the same time, the indirect immunoflourescence was used to determine the antinuclear antibodies and anti-ds DNA antibodies. The enzyme immunoassay of the band was used to determine the anti-Smith antibodies. And then statisticsed and analyzed the relationships between AnuA and the other laboratory results in the SLE patients. Results: The sensitivity and specificity of AnuA in SLE were 76.0% and 98.6%, the sensitivity of AnuA was lower than ANA(P﹤0.01), but higher than anti-ds DNA antibodies(P>0.05) and anti-Smith antibodies(P﹤0.01). And the specificity of AnuA was lower than ANA(P﹤0.01), higher than anti-Smith antibodies(P>0.05), same to anti-ds DNA antibodies(P>0.05). The positive rate of AnuA in SLE patients with negative anti-ds DNA antibodies and anti-Smith antibodies were 47.6% and 73.8% respectively. Conclusion: AnuA in the diagnosis of SLE have a high sensitivity and specificity. Combined detection of AnuA, ANA, anti-ds DNA antibodies and anti-Smith antibodies were had important clinical significance and value in the diagnosis of SLE.
