CMIA 与 ELISA 两种方法在梅毒血清学诊断中的应用

摘要

Objective To analyze the application of CMIA and ELISA in serological diagnosis of syphilis. Method 104 ca-ses of syphilis patients(confirmed by TPPA)and 104 cases of healthy human serum were selected as the experimental group and the control group respectively,dectected by both methods at the same time and further analyzed the results. Results CMIA detec-ted 104 cases of the experimental group all positive,and 104 cases in the control group were all negative,the sensitivity and spe-cificity were both 100%. ELISA detected 102 cases of the experimental group were positive,two cases of negative. 103 cases of the control group were negative,one case of positive,the sensitivity and specificity were 98. 08% and 99. 04% respective-ly. Although the sensitivity and specificity of ELISA were lower than CMIA,there was no statistically significant difference be-tween them(P > 0. 05). Conclusion Both the two methods are ideal confirmatory test for syphilis,the sensitivity and specificity are high. CMIA is Simple and convenient,it can be readily detected all time,if single specimen can be operated,but it needs to match the appropriate instrument;ELISA is a manual and complicated operation,its reproducibility is poor,need to bulk detec-tion,but the requirement of instrument is low,each laboratory can choose their suitable method according to their own circum-stances.%目的：分析化学发光微粒子免疫分析法（CMIA）与酶联免疫吸附法（ELISA）在梅毒血清学诊断中的应用价值。方法：选取104例梅毒患者血清（用 TPPA 法进行确证）此为试验组，另外选取104例健康人血清，此为对照组，同时用两种方法检测并对结果进行分析。结果：CMIA 法检出试验组104例全部为阳性，对照组104例全部为阴性，敏感性及特异性都达到了100％，而 ELISA 法检出试验组102例阳性2例阴性，对照组103例阴性1例阳性，敏感性98.08％，特异性99.04％。虽然 ELISA 法敏感性略有差距，但是差异无统计学意义（P ＞0.05）。结论：两种方法都是理想的梅毒确证试验，敏感性和特异性都较高。CMIA 简单方便，可随时检测，单个标本也可操作，需要配套相应的仪器；ELISA 需手工操作，繁琐，重复性差，需成批检测，但仪器要求较低，各实验室可根据各自的情况选择。