检验医学与临床
檢驗醫學與臨床
검험의학여림상
JOURNAL OF LABORATORY MEDICINE AND CLINICAL SCIENCES
2015年
3期
334-336
,共3页
王震%龚玉华%钱彩娣%孙春红%王雪梅%施瑜%周丽萍%傅行礼%邵启祥
王震%龔玉華%錢綵娣%孫春紅%王雪梅%施瑜%週麗萍%傅行禮%邵啟祥
왕진%공옥화%전채제%손춘홍%왕설매%시유%주려평%부행례%소계상
结核分枝杆菌%免疫磁珠%聚合酶链反应-酶联免疫吸附试验%检测方法
結覈分枝桿菌%免疫磁珠%聚閤酶鏈反應-酶聯免疫吸附試驗%檢測方法
결핵분지간균%면역자주%취합매련반응-매련면역흡부시험%검측방법
mycobacterium tuberculosis%immunomagnetic beads%PCR-ELISA%detection methods
目的：比较和分析免疫磁珠捕获联合双内标聚合酶链反应‐酶联免疫吸附试验定量检测结核杆菌技术（IMC‐PCR‐ELISA）与其他几种结核杆菌检测法在结核病诊断中的临床应用价值。方法以102例结核分枝杆菌痰培养阳性的患者作为阳性对照，以48例结核分枝杆菌培养阴性的非结核普通住院患者作为阴性对照。比较抗酸染色涂片法（AFS）、免疫磁珠‐抗酸染色涂片法（IMC‐AFS）、金标抗结核抗体检测法（DICA ）、普通 PCR及IMC‐PCR‐ELISA的敏感性及特异性。结果 IMC‐PCR‐ELISA定量检测结核分枝杆菌全过程约4．5 h ，最低检测限为5 copy／μL ，本法的特异性和敏感性均为100．00％，其他4种（AFS、IMC‐AFS、DICA、普通PCR）检测方法的敏感性分别为35．29％、43．14％、60．78％、93．14％，特异性分别为95．83％、95．83％、75．00％、91．67％。结论 IMC‐PCR‐ELISA与AFS、IMC‐AFS、DICA及普通PCR相比，具有快速、灵敏、特异、可定量的特点，是临床快速诊断结核病的有效检测方法。
目的：比較和分析免疫磁珠捕穫聯閤雙內標聚閤酶鏈反應‐酶聯免疫吸附試驗定量檢測結覈桿菌技術（IMC‐PCR‐ELISA）與其他幾種結覈桿菌檢測法在結覈病診斷中的臨床應用價值。方法以102例結覈分枝桿菌痰培養暘性的患者作為暘性對照，以48例結覈分枝桿菌培養陰性的非結覈普通住院患者作為陰性對照。比較抗痠染色塗片法（AFS）、免疫磁珠‐抗痠染色塗片法（IMC‐AFS）、金標抗結覈抗體檢測法（DICA ）、普通 PCR及IMC‐PCR‐ELISA的敏感性及特異性。結果 IMC‐PCR‐ELISA定量檢測結覈分枝桿菌全過程約4．5 h ，最低檢測限為5 copy／μL ，本法的特異性和敏感性均為100．00％，其他4種（AFS、IMC‐AFS、DICA、普通PCR）檢測方法的敏感性分彆為35．29％、43．14％、60．78％、93．14％，特異性分彆為95．83％、95．83％、75．00％、91．67％。結論 IMC‐PCR‐ELISA與AFS、IMC‐AFS、DICA及普通PCR相比，具有快速、靈敏、特異、可定量的特點，是臨床快速診斷結覈病的有效檢測方法。
목적：비교화분석면역자주포획연합쌍내표취합매련반응‐매련면역흡부시험정량검측결핵간균기술（IMC‐PCR‐ELISA）여기타궤충결핵간균검측법재결핵병진단중적림상응용개치。방법이102례결핵분지간균담배양양성적환자작위양성대조，이48례결핵분지간균배양음성적비결핵보통주원환자작위음성대조。비교항산염색도편법（AFS）、면역자주‐항산염색도편법（IMC‐AFS）、금표항결핵항체검측법（DICA ）、보통 PCR급IMC‐PCR‐ELISA적민감성급특이성。결과 IMC‐PCR‐ELISA정량검측결핵분지간균전과정약4．5 h ，최저검측한위5 copy／μL ，본법적특이성화민감성균위100．00％，기타4충（AFS、IMC‐AFS、DICA、보통PCR）검측방법적민감성분별위35．29％、43．14％、60．78％、93．14％，특이성분별위95．83％、95．83％、75．00％、91．67％。결론 IMC‐PCR‐ELISA여AFS、IMC‐AFS、DICA급보통PCR상비，구유쾌속、령민、특이、가정량적특점，시림상쾌속진단결핵병적유효검측방법。
Objective To analyze and compare the detection method for tuberculosis by immunomagnetic beads capture combined with PCR‐ELISA with double internal standard (IMC‐PCR‐ELISA) and other testing methods, and discuss its clinic application. Methods To tally 102 patients with culture‐positive tuberculosis from sputum were used as positive control, 48 nontuberculosis inpatients with culture‐negative tuberculosis from sputum were used as negative control. And the sensitivity and specificity of smear acid‐fast stain (AFS), immune magnetic beads smear acid‐fast stain method (IMC‐AFS), jinbiao anti‐tuberculosis antibody assay (DICA), ordinary PCR and IMC‐PCR‐ELISA were compared. Results The results showed that the IMC‐PCR‐ELISA could yield quantitative results within about 4. 5 h with a detection limit at 5 copy/μL, the specificity and sensitivity of this method were all 100. 00%. The sensitivity of the AFS, IMC‐AFS, DICA and ordinary PCR were 35. 29%, 43. 14%, 60. 78% and 93. 14%, while the specificity were 95. 83%, 95. 83%, 75. 00% and 91. 67%, respectively. Conclusion Compared with AFS, IMC‐AFS, DICA and ordinary PCR, the IMC‐PCR‐ELISA is rapid, sensitive, secific and quantitative method for detecting tuber‐culosis, which can be taken as a helpful method for rapid detection of TB.
