...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical and diagnostic laboratory immunology >Comparison of Two Commercial Microimmunofluorescence Kits and an Enzyme Immunoassay Kit for Detection of Serum Immunoglobulin G Antibodies to Chlamydia pneumoniae
【24h】

Comparison of Two Commercial Microimmunofluorescence Kits and an Enzyme Immunoassay Kit for Detection of Serum Immunoglobulin G Antibodies to Chlamydia pneumoniae

机译:两种商用微免疫荧光试剂盒和酶免疫分析试剂盒检测肺炎衣原体血清免疫球蛋白G抗体的比较

获取原文
           

摘要

We compared the MRL and the Labsystems Chlamydia pneumoniae microimmunofluorescence (MIF) immunoglobulin G (IgG) kits and the Labsystems enzyme immunoassay (EIA) kit in a blinded study of 83 serum samples in which we evaluated titers, cross-reactivity to other species, and reproducibility. There was no statistically significant difference between the MRL and the Labsystems MIF kits in the endpoint titers of IgG antibody to C. pneumoniae. The correlation between the results obtained with these two MIF kits was excellent (r = 0.95; P = 0.001). The cross-reactivity of the C. pneumoniae-positive sera with C. trachomatis- and C. psittaci-positive sera was assessed for each MIF kit. ForC. pneumoniae-positive sera with titers of ≥32, the Labsystems MIF kit exhibited more cross-reactivity to C. psittaci than the MRL kit did. The values obtained with the Labsystems EIA kit represented single dilutions of serum specimens expressed as enzymeimmuno units on a continuous scale. The results obtained with the Labsystems EIA kit correlated moderately well with those obtained with each MIF kit when they were compared for their abilities to detect IgG antibodies to C. pneumoniae(for the MRL MIF kit, r = 0.79 [P = 0.001]; for the Labsystems MIF kit, r = 0.78 [P = 0.001]). The results obtained with the commercial MRL and Labsystems MIF kits and the Labsystems EIA kit tested were reproducible; and the kits were standardized, had quality control reagents, and are suitable for detection of C. pneumoniae antibodies in serum and for use in interlaboratory studies. Validation of the use of these kits for clinical diagnosis still needs further evaluation.
机译:我们在83个血清样本的盲研究中比较了MRL和Labsystems肺炎衣原体肺炎衣原体微免疫荧光(MIF)免疫球蛋白G(IgG)试剂盒和Labsystems酶免疫测定(EIA)试剂盒,我们在其中评估了效价,交叉与其他物种的反应性和可重复性。 MRL和Labsystems MIF试剂盒之间针对E的IgG抗体的终点滴度在统计学上没有显着差异。肺炎。用这两种MIF试剂盒获得的结果之间的相关性极好( r = 0.95; P = 0.001)。 C的交叉反应性。 C的肺炎阳性血清。沙眼-和 C。每个MIF试剂盒均评估了psittaci阳性血清。对于 C。滴度≥32的肺炎阳性血清,Labsystems MIF试剂盒对 C表现出更多的交叉反应性。 psittaci 比MRL试剂盒更适合。用Labsystems EIA试剂盒获得的值代表连续稀释的以酶免疫单位表示的血清样品的单倍稀释度。将Labsystems EIA试剂盒获得的结果与每个MIF试剂盒获得的结果进行比较,比较它们检测IgG抗体的能力。肺炎(对于MRL MIF试剂盒, r = 0.79 [ P = 0.001];对于Labsystems MIF试剂盒, r = 0.78 [ P = 0.001])。使用商业MRL和Labsystems MIF套件以及经测试的Labsystems EIA套件所获得的结果是可重复的;并且该试剂盒已标准化,具有质量控制试剂,适用于 C的检测。血清中的肺炎链球菌抗体,用于实验室间研究。这些试剂盒用于临床诊断的验证仍需进一步评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号