检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:吴晓冬[1] 杨绍娟[1] 崔亚南[1] 卜丽莎[1]
机构地区:[1]吉林大学中日联谊医院中心实验室,吉林长春130033
出 处:《中国实验诊断学》2005年第5期757-758,共2页Chinese Journal of Laboratory Diagnosis
摘 要:目的比较聚合酶链反应-序列特异引物法(PCR-SSP)基因分型与血清学抗原分型两种HLA分型方法的应用结果。方法对50例已进行HLA血清学分型的肾脏移植患者,应用PCR-SSP法对HLA-Ⅰ类(A、B位点)、Ⅱ类(DR、DQ位点)基因进行扩增,琼脂糖凝胶电泳分析PCR产物并确定其基因型。结果基因分型结果与血清学分型一致者41例,基因分型能明显判断而血清学分型无法判断者有8例,其中B位点1例,DR位点6例,DQ位点1例,另外有1例两种分型方法结果HLA-Ⅱ类DR位点有不同。结论PCR-SSP方法具有操作简单、快速、结果可靠的特点,特别是对HLA-Ⅱ类的结果判定比血清学分型方法更准确,能满足组织配型的需要。Objeetive To investigate the different between PCR-SSP method and blood serum method in identification of HLA typing. Methods To identify the HLA typing by PCR-SSP method in 50 patients which was already done by serum method. Results In 41 patients the result was the same with two methods: 8 patients was identified by PCR-SSP method, but was failed in blood serum method, One was B site, six was DR site and one was DQ site. In 1 patient the results was different between two methods. Conclusion The PCR-SSP method was easy to control, faster and more sensitive than serum method.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:3.129.22.159