三种初筛方法检测HIV抗体的结果比较及评估  

Compare and Evaluate Three Primary Screening Methods for Detection of HIV Antibody

作　　者：万德胜[1] 陈万宁[1] 廖小莲[1] 郑和香[1] 

机构地区：[1]广东省东莞市人民医院检验科,东莞523018

出　　处：《热带医学杂志》2007年第9期869-870,881,共3页Journal of Tropical Medicine

摘　　要：目的比较酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)、明胶颗粒凝集试验(PA)、胶体硒免疫层析法(ICA)检测人类免疫缺陷病毒抗体的结果,了解这三种方法的优劣,探讨临床实验室初筛诊断HIV方法的灵敏性和准确性。方法用卫生部HIV质控血清和免疫印迹法(WB)确认的HIV抗体阳性标本和阴性标本,分别用ELISA法、PA法及ICA法检测;用免疫印迹法确认的HIV阳性的标本作倍比稀释后,再分别用PA法、ELISA法及ICA法检测。结果80例经免疫印迹法确认的HIV阳性患者,ELISA法、PA法、ICA法的检出符合率分别为100%、98.8%、97.5%;经稀释法检测,ELISA法较PA法和ICA法敏感,其检测的准确性分别为97.5%、97.5%、92.5%。结论筛查HIV抗体方法最好选用ELISA法或PA法,以防漏检。Objective To compare the results of HIV antibody detection by three primary screening methods： ELISA, PA, and ICA, and evaluate the sensitivity, accuracy, advantages and shortcomings of the three methods. Methods HIV control serum samples were obtained from the Health Department and HIV positive and negative samples were confirmed by western blot. The confirmed samples were screened by ELISA, PA and ICA methods. Western blot confirmed HIV positive samples were 2-fold diluted and then used for testing with PA, ELISA and ICA methods. Results In eighty western blot confirmed HIV positive samples, the screening accordant rates of the ELISA, PA and ICA methods are 100%, 98.8%, and 97.5%, respectively. ELISA is more sensitive than PA and ICA in testing diluted samples, with the accuracy of 97.5%, 97.5%, and 92.5%, respectively. Conclusion It is best to choose ELISA or PA to screen for HIV antibody, with higher sensitivity and accuracy.

关 键 词：HIV抗体 酶联免疫吸附试验 明胶颗粒凝集试验 免疫层析法 

分 类 号：R512.99[医药卫生—内科学]