...
首页> 外文期刊>The Journal of Infectious Diseases >Screening for syphilis with the treponemal immunoassay: analysis of discordant serology results and implications for clinical management.
【24h】

Screening for syphilis with the treponemal immunoassay: analysis of discordant serology results and implications for clinical management.

机译:用梅毒螺旋体免疫测定法筛查梅毒:分析不一致的血清学结果及其对临床管理的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

BACKGROUND: Screening for syphilis with treponemal chemiluminescence immunoassays (CIA) identifies patients with discordant serology who are not identified with traditional screening methods (eg, CIA-positive, rapid plasma regain (RPR)-negative). We sought to describe the clinical characteristics and management of patients with discordant syphilis serology. METHODS: From August 2007-October 2007, patients with CIA-positive, RPR-negative serology were tested with the Treponema pallidum particle agglutination assay (TP-PA) at Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Clinical and demographic characteristics, prior syphilis history and CIA index values were compared for CIA-positive, RPR-negative patients according to TP-PA status. RESULTS: Of 21,623 assays, 439 (2%) were CIA-positive and 255/439 (58%) were RPR-negative; subsequently, 184 (72%) were TP-PA-positive and 71 (28%) were TP-PA--negative. TP-PA--positive patients were more likely to be male, HIV-positive, homosexual, previously treated for syphilis (57% versus 9%), with higher median CIA index values (9.8 versus 1.6) (all P < .0001). After repeat testing, 7/31 (23%) CIA-positive, RPR-negative, TP-PA--negative patients seroreverted to CIA-negative. CONCLUSIONS: TP-PA results in conjunction with clinical/behavioral assessment helped guide the management of patients with CIA-positive, RPR-negative serology. TP-PA-positive patients were both highly likely to have prior syphilis and major epidemiologic risk factors for syphilis. CIA-positive, RPR-negative, TP-PA-negative serology may represent a false-positive CIA in low-prevalence populations.
机译:背景:用梅毒螺旋体化学发光免疫分析法(CIA)筛查梅毒可鉴别出血清学不一致的患者,而传统筛查方法(例如CIA阳性,快速血浆恢复(RPR)阴性)则无法鉴定。我们试图描述梅毒血清学不一致的患者的临床特征和治疗。方法:从2007年8月至2007年10月,在北加州凯泽永久医院采用梅毒螺旋体颗粒凝集试验(TP-PA)对CIA阳性,RPR阴性的血清学患者进行检测。根据TP-PA状态,比较CIA阳性,RPR阴性的患者的临床和人口统计学特征,梅毒既往史和CIA指数值。结果:在21,623个测定中,439(2%)为CIA阳性,255/439(58%)为RPR阴性。随后,TP-PA阳性184例(72%),TP-PA阴性71例(28%)。 TP-PA阳性患者更有可能是男性,HIV阳性,同性恋者,以前接受过梅毒治疗(57%比9%),中位CIA指数值较高(9.8比1.6)(所有P <.0001) 。重复测试后,有7/31(23%)CIA阳性,RPR阴性,TP-PA阴性的患者对CIA阴性。结论:TP-PA结果结合临床/行为评估有助于指导CIA阳性,RPR阴性血清学患者的治疗。 TP-PA阳性患者极有可能患有梅毒,并且是梅毒的主要流行病学危险因素。 CIA阳性,RPR阴性,TP-PA阴性血清学可能代表低流行人群中的CIA假阳性。

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