吖啶酯化学发光法与酶联免疫法检测传染病八项的对比

Comparison of the result of eight infectious diseases by analytical chemiluminescence and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

目的分析化学发光法与酶联免疫法(ELISA)检测传染病八项结果。方法收集2017年11月至2018年6月在东莞市人民医院、河北省邢台市第三医院、香港大学深圳医院、南方大学附属深圳医院门诊进行体检的标本1071例,分别采用雅培化学发光法和亚辉龙化学发光法及ELISA进行检测。统计亚辉龙化学发光法与雅培化学发光法检测结果的符合率,并比较化学发光法与酶联免疫吸附对传染病八项检测的灵敏度、准确性和特异度。结果通过对1071例体检者的检测结果进行分析比较,化学发光的灵敏度、特异度、阳性率和重复性均好于ELISA,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论与ELISA比较,化学发光法自动化程度更高、检测时间更短、结果稳定,灵敏度特异性都优于ELISA,且进行定性定量分析,可以更好地为临床服务。

Objective To compare the result of eight infectious diseases by analytical chemiluminescence and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Methods 1 071 samples were collected from November 2017 to June 2018 in the outpatient clinic of Dongguan People's Hospital,the third Hospital of Xingtai,the University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital,Shenzhen Maternal and Child Health Hospital Affiliated to Southern Medical University.The samples were detected by Abbott chemiluminescence method,aminolone chemiluminescence method and ELISA respectively.The coincidence rate between the chemiluminescence assay and Abbott chemiluminescence assay was analyzed.The sensitivity,accuracy and specificity of chemiluminescence assay and ELISA for the detection of infectious diseases were compared. Results The sensitivity,specificity,positive rate and repeatability of chemiluminescence were better than that of ELISA,and the difference was statistically significant( P <0.05). Conclusion Compared with ELISA,chemiluminescence assay has higher automation,shorter reaction time,more stable results and higher sensitivity specificity than ELISA.