期刊文献+

百日咳疑似病例实验室检测法的比较研究 被引量:2

Comparison of laboratory detection methods of suspected pertussis cases
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的对2019年河南省监测医院的百日咳疑似病例进行实时荧光聚合酶链式反应(real-time polymerase chain reaction,real-time PCR)和定量ELISA实验室检测比较。方法4家监测医院采集百日咳疑似病例的鼻咽拭子和血清,通过real-time PCR检测百日咳鲍特菌(Bordetella Pertussis)特异性核酸片段和定量ELISA检测百日咳毒素抗体(anti-pertussis toxin IgG,PT-IgG)。结果对446例百日咳疑似病例实验室共检测出126例阳性病例,阳性率为28.25%。阳性和阴性病例的发病天数差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。各年龄组百日咳阳性率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);各年龄组的发病天数差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。鼻咽拭子real-time PCR检出百日咳鲍特菌核酸阳性76例,阳性率为17.04%,阳性和阴性病例的发病天数差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。各年龄组间阳性率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。ELISA检测PT-IgG抗体浓度,检出阳性74例,阳性率为16.59%,发病天数差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。各年龄组ELISA检测阳性率的差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。发病>22~29 d时检测阳性率最高,为39.06%,不同发病天数检测阳性率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。发病1~15 d内real-time PCR检测阳性率最高,为25.58%,不同发病天数real-time PCR检测阳性率差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。>22~29 d ELISA检测阳性率最高,为25.00%,不同发病天数ELISA检测阳性率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。>22~29 d时,同时2种方法检测阳性率最高,为9.38%。2种检测方法结果均为阳性的一致率为5.38%。结论real-time PCR和ELISA检测均适用于实验室百日咳疑似病例检测且有很好的互补性,建议可将二者同时应用于百日咳的实验室检测。 Objective To monitor hospital’s suspected cases of pertussis for laboratory testing and to compare the performance of two detection methods,real-time polymerase chain reaction(real-time PCR)and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA).Methods Nasopharyngeal swabs and sera of suspected cases of pertussis were collected from four surveillance hospitals in Henan Province in 2019.Real-time PCR was used to detect DNA of Bordetella pertussis,and ELISA was used to quantitatively detect anti-pertussis toxin IgG(PT-IgG).Results A total of 126 positive cases were detected in 446 suspected cases of pertussis,with an overall positive rate of 28.25%.Among them,76 cases were detected by real-time PCR,with a positive rate of 17.04%;there was significant difference in onset days between positive and negative cases(P<0.05),as well as the positive rates among different age groups(P<0.05).74 cases were detected by ELISA,with a positive rate of 16.59%;and the difference in the positive rate among different age groups was significant(P<0.05).The overall positive rate was the highest in days 22;to 29;after onset,accounting for 39.06%,with significant difference in onset days(P<0.05).Real-time PCR had the highest positive rate when the duration of illness was less than 15 days,accounting for 25.58%;while the positive rate of ELISA reached peak at the period of 22 to 29 days,with a positive rate of 25.00%.There was significant difference in onset days of positive cases detected by real-time PCR(P<0.05),but not by ELISA.Simultaneous detection of positive cases by the two methods got the highest positive rate during onset period of 22 to 29 days,accounting for 9.38%.The consistent rate of positive cases detected by the two methods was 5.38%.Conclusion Both real-time PCR and PT-IgG ELISA are suggested to apply for laboratory diagnosis of suspected pertussis cases simultaneously with its good applicability and complementarity to each other.
作者 刘倩 王文慧 豆巧华 孔江南 李君 吕宛玉 徐瑾 LIU Qian;WANG Wen-hui;DOU Qiao-hua;KONG Jiang-nan;LI Jun;Lü Wan-yu;XU Jin(Institute of EPI,Henan.Center for Disease Control and Prevention,Zhengzhou 450016,Henan Province,China)
出处 《微生物学免疫学进展》 CAS 2022年第1期53-57,共5页 Progress In Microbiology and Immunology
基金 河南省二○一六年科技发展计划(162102310309)。
关键词 百日咳 实时荧光聚合酶链式反应 酶联免疫吸附试验 Pertussis Real-time polymerase chain reaction Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
  • 相关文献

参考文献9

二级参考文献98

  • 1符剑,王跃芳,徐宝祥,胡昱,郁子扬.浙江省1954-2004年百日咳流行病学分析[J].中国计划免疫,2005,11(4):279-281. 被引量:24
  • 2孟成艳,张文宏.全球百日咳疾病负担的现状与展望[J].中国计划免疫,2006,12(4):318-321. 被引量:24
  • 3殷大鹏,王华庆,曹玲生,樊春祥,周玉清,梁晓峰.中国2004~2006年百日咳流行病学分析[J].中国计划免疫,2007,13(3):245-247. 被引量:33
  • 4安志杰,张颖,左树岩,张峰,刘西珍,田永东,史建梅,申海江,张新平,梁晓峰.榆林市百日咳流行病学分析及危险因素研究[J].中国计划免疫,2007,13(3):252-256. 被引量:8
  • 5de Melker HE, Schellekens JF, Neppelenbroek SE, et al. Reemergence of pertussis in the highly vaccinated population of the Netherlands: observations on surveillance data [J]. Emerg Infect Dis, 2000, 6 (4):348-357.
  • 6Celentano LP, Massari M, Paramatti D, et al. Resurgence of pertussis in Europe [J], Pediatr Infect Dis J, 2005, 24 (9):761-765.
  • 7CDC. Pertussis--Califomia, January-June 2010 [J]. MMWR, 2010, 59 (26): 817.
  • 8Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy. More states report rising pertussis cases [EB/OL]http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/ content/other/news/aug0210portussis.html.
  • 9Roehr B. Whooping cough outbreak hits several US states [J]. BMJ, 2010, 341:c4627.
  • 10Strebel P, Nordin J, Edwards K, et al. Population-based incidence of pertussis among adolescents and adults, Minnesota, 1995-1996 [J]. J Infect Dis, 2001, 183 (9) :1353-1359.

共引文献150

同被引文献39

引证文献2

二级引证文献2

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部