摘要
分别采用镜检、巢式PCR和荧光定量PCR等3种检测方法对收集到的79份疟疾血样进行检测,并对检测结果进行比较分析。结合患者临床症状和3种检测结果, 79份血样最终确诊74份为疟原虫阳性,阳性率为93.7%(74/79),其中镜检阳性检出率为82.3%(65/79),巢式PCR阳性检出率为82.3%(65/79),荧光定量PCR阳性检出率为93.7%(74/79),荧光定量PCR阳性检出率高于其他两种方法(P <0.05)。镜检和巢式PCR的一致率为78.4%(58/74),镜检和荧光定量PCR的一致率为63.5%(47/74),巢式PCR和荧光定量PCR的一致率为83.8%(62/74)。相比镜检和巢式PCR,荧光定量PCR敏感性和检出率更高,且用时更短。
Seventy-nine malaria samples were examined by microscopy,nested PCR and fluorescence quantitative PCR,and the detection rate was analyzed among the three methods.After combining clinical symptoms of the patients and results of the three methods,74 of the 79 samples were confirmed to be malaria infection,with a positive rate of 93.7%(74/79).Specifically,the detection rate of microscopy,nested PCR and fluorescence quantitative PCR were 82.3%(65/79),82.3%(65/79) and 93.7%(74/79),respectively.The concordance rate between microscopy and nested PCR was 78.4%(58/74),and that between microscopy and fluorescence quantitative PCR was 63.5%(47/74),between nested PCR and fluorescence quantitative PCR was 83.8%(62/74).In addition,the detection rate of fluorescence quantitative PCR was significantly higher than that of the nested PCR(P < 0.05).Compared with microscopy and nested PCR,the fluorescence quantitative PCR has higher sensitivity and positive detection rate,and is less time-consuming.
作者
李素华
李静
高丽君
张雅兰
周瑞敏
钱丹
杨成运
刘颖
赵玉玲
张红卫
LI Su-hua;LI Jing;GAO Li-jun;ZHANG Ya-lan;ZHOU Rui-min;QIAN Dan;YANG Cheng-yun;LIU Ying;ZHAO Yu-ling;ZHANG Hong-wei(Henan Center for Disease Control and Prevention,Zhengzhou 450016,China;Henan International Travel Healthcare Center,Zhengzhou 450046,China)
出处
《中国寄生虫学与寄生虫病杂志》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2019年第2期232-234,共3页
Chinese Journal of Parasitology and Parasitic Diseases
基金
河南省医学科技攻关计划项目(No.201702274
No.162102310066)
河南省科技攻关项目(No.162102310035)~~
关键词
疟疾
镜检
巢式PCR
荧光定量PCR
Malaria Microscopy Nested PCR Fluorescence quantitative PCR