CAJ | 학술논문

目的：分析以间接免疫荧光法（IIF）法筛查的抗核抗体谱（ANAs）、抗双链DNA（dsDNA）抗体结果与线性免疫印迹法（LIA）检测ANAs的结果，了解2种方法是否可以相互取代及其联合检测的意义。方法230例临床送检样本同时采用2种方法检测ANAs、抗dsDNA抗体与ANAs特异性抗体，分析检测结果的相互关系并寻找对临床有价值的检测方法。结果2种方法检测结果总体符合率为57.0%；IIF（-）/LIA（+）患者中最易漏检的抗体为抗SSA抗体、Ro52、Jo-1、线粒体（AMA）-M2抗体。 IIF（+）/LIA（-）中系统性红斑狼疮（SLE）组与非自身免疫病（AID）组在各个滴度间比较，差异均有统计学意义。检测抗dsDNA抗体，绿蝇短膜虫抗原片（CL）-IIF法的特异性和敏感性都超过了LIA法。SLE患者单一检测IIF-ANA敏感性较高，而LIA-ANAs特异性较高。2种方法联合诊断，敏感性提高。结论无论单独使用哪种检测方法都可能出现漏检的情况。2种方法不能互相代替，需同步检查。CL-IIF法检测抗dsDNA抗体的结果较LIA法更理想。
목적：분석이간접면역형광법（IIF）법사사적항핵항체보（ANAs）、항쌍련DNA（dsDNA）항체결과여선성면역인적법（LIA）검측ANAs적결과，료해2충방법시부가이상호취대급기연합검측적의의。방법230례림상송검양본동시채용2충방법검측ANAs、항dsDNA항체여ANAs특이성항체，분석검측결과적상호관계병심조대림상유개치적검측방법。결과2충방법검측결과총체부합솔위57.0%；IIF（-）/LIA（+）환자중최역루검적항체위항SSA항체、Ro52、Jo-1、선립체（AMA）-M2항체。 IIF（+）/LIA（-）중계통성홍반랑창（SLE）조여비자신면역병（AID）조재각개적도간비교，차이균유통계학의의。검측항dsDNA항체，록승단막충항원편（CL）-IIF법적특이성화민감성도초과료LIA법。SLE환자단일검측IIF-ANA민감성교고，이LIA-ANAs특이성교고。2충방법연합진단，민감성제고。결론무론단독사용나충검측방법도가능출현루검적정황。2충방법불능호상대체，수동보검사。CL-IIF법검측항dsDNA항체적결과교LIA법경이상。
Objective To analyze the method of immunofluorescence (IIF) antinuclear antibody screening, anti dsDNA antibodies(dsDNA) results with western blotting method (LIA) detection antinuclear antibodies (ANAs) result, determine whether the two methods can replace each other and the meaning of joint detection. Methods In 230 cases of clinical inspection samples at the same time using two methods of detecting antinuclear antibodies , dsDNA antibodies and ANAs specificity, analysis the relationship of the test results and find the detection methods of clinical value. Results The testing results of two methods of total coincidence rate is 57.0%; IIF(-)/LIA(+) in patients with the leakiness antibodies for anti SSA, Ro52, Jo-1, the AMA-M2 antibodies. IIF(+)/LIA(-) in SLE group and comparison between the drop degree of the AID group, difference has statistical significance. To detect resistance dsDNA antibody , the CL-IIF method more than the LIA method in specificity and sensitivity. SLE patients with single detection IIF-ANA sensitivity is higher, and LIA-ANAs specificity is higher. Two methods of joint diagnosis, increased sensitivity. Conclusion No matter use which kinds of detection methods alone is likely to be a leak. Two methods can′t replace each other, should be synchronized. The CL-IIF test results of a LIA dsDNA antibodies method is more ideal.