液体培养法与荧光探针PCR检测阴道分泌物中解脲脲原体的应用价值

Application Value of Liquid Culture Method with Fluorescent Probe PCR for Detecting Ureaplasma Urealyticum in Vaginal Secretions

目的评价荧光探针聚合酶链式反应(polymerase chain reaction,PCR)法与液体培养基培养法检测阴道分泌物中解脲脲原体(ureaplasma urealyticum,UU)的临床应用价值。方法选取江苏省东台市人民医院检验科2019年1月—2021年12月收治的138例疑似泌尿生殖道感染者,分别采用荧光探针PCR法和液体培养法检测阴道分泌物,以Amsel临床诊断标准为金标准,比较两种方法的解脲脲原体检出率,并比较联合方式和单一方式检测疾病的诊断效能,对比两种方式报告获取时间。结果液体培养基培养法对UU的检出率为76.09%,高于荧光探针PCR法的57.25%,差异有统计学意义(P=0.031);两种方式联合对疾病的诊断灵敏度、特异度和准确率高于单一检测方式,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。荧光探针PCR法报告获取时间明显短于液体培养基培养法,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。结论建议临床联合使用两种方法同时检测,更有利于解脲脲原体感染的诊断和治疗。

Objective To evaluate the clinical application value of fluorescent probe PCR method and liquid medium culture method for the detection of ureaplasma urealyticum(UU)in vaginal secretions.Methods 138 cases of suspected genitourinary tract infections admitted to the Department of Laboratory of Dongtai People's Hospital,Jiangsu Province,from January 2019 to December 2021 were included,and vaginal secretions were detected by fluorescent probe PCR and liquid culture method,respectively,and the detection rate of ureaplasma urealyticum in vaginal secretions was compared between the two methods using Amsel clinical diagnostic criteria as the gold standard.The detection rate of ureaplasma urealyticum was compared between the two methods,and the diagnostic efficacy of the combined detection method and the single detection method was compared,and the acquisition time of the two methods was compared.Results The detection rate of the liquid medium culture method was 76.04%for UU,which was higher than the 57.25%for the fluorescent probe PCR method,the differences was statistically significant(P=0.031).The diagnostic sensitivity,specificity and accuracy of the combination of the two methods were higher than those of the single detection method,the differences was statistically significant(P<0.05).The acquisition time reported by fluorescent probe PCR method was significantly shorter than that by liquid medium culture method,and the difference was statistically significant(P<0.05).Conclusion It is recommended that the clinical combination of the two methods for simultaneous testing is more beneficial to the diagnosis and treatment of ureaplasma urealyticum infection.