梅毒螺旋体不同检测方法的比较

摘要

目的:探讨梅毒螺旋体不同检测方法的特异性和灵敏性.方法:对2008年1月~2011年3月收集的1 548份血清采用不同方法进行梅毒螺旋体的检测,以梅毒螺旋体抗体被动颗粒凝集试验检测结果为金标准,将酶联免疫吸附试验与快速血浆反应素试验检测结果与之比较,计算两者的特异性和灵敏性.结果:快速血浆反应素试验假阴性率为18.75%,酶联免疫吸附试验未出现假阴性,两者比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);快速血浆反应素试验假阳性率为0.13%,酶联免疫吸附试验假阳性率为0.07%,两者比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).结论:快速血浆反应素试验灵敏性低于酶联免疫吸附试验,而两者特异性无显著差异,因此,酶联免疫吸附试验更适用于梅毒螺旋体的筛查,以避免漏诊.%Objective: To investigate the sensitivity and specificity of different test methods of treponema pallidum. Methods: 1 548 cases of serum from January 2008 to March 2011 were tested in different methods, The TPPA was regarded as the gold standard. The results of the RPR and ELISA were compared with it, and then the sensitivity and specificity of the two methods were calculated. Results: The false-negative rate of RPR was 18.75%, The false-negative rate of ELISA was 0, the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05). The false-positive rate of RPR was 0.13%, The false-positive rate of ELISA was 0.07%, there was no significant difference (P>0.05). Conclusion: The sensitivity of RPR is lower than ELISA, yet the specificity shows no difference, so ELISA is more suitable for screening for the treponema pallidum, in order to avoid missed diagnosis.