几种检测淋病奈瑟菌方法的比较研究  

Comparison of several methods for identification neisseria gonorrhoeae

作　　者：周杨霄[1] 黄芬[1] 王茂峰[1] 李国钢[1] 赵升[1] 万汝根[1] 

机构地区：[1]温州医学院附属东阳医院(东阳市人民医院)检验科,浙江东阳322100

出　　处：《中国现代医生》2012年第11期88-89,共2页China Modern Doctor

摘　　要：目的通过比较几种检测淋病奈瑟菌的方法,评价其在临床诊断中的应用价值。方法收集我院2009年10月～2010年12月431例疑似淋病奈瑟菌感染患者标本,分别做直接涂片染色、培养鉴定、聚合酶链反应(PCR)、斑点金免疫渗滤(dot immunogold filtration assay,DIGFA)4种检测,以培养鉴定为对照评价各方法的临床应用价值。结果直接涂片染色法阳性检出率低于其他三种方法(P<0.05),斑点金免疫渗滤法与培养鉴定两种检测方法阳性检出率比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。PCR检测法阳性检出率高于其他三种方法(P<0.05)。结论在临床微生物诊断工作中建议选择至少两种检测方法同时检测淋病奈瑟菌以提高阳性检出率。Objective By comparison several methods for identification neisseria gonorrhoeae and to assess the value of those methods in clinical diagnosis.Methods Samples were obtained from 431 cases with suspected infection by neisseria gonorrhoeae,collected from Oct 2009 to Dec 2010.We used four methods（Gram stained direct smears,Culture and identification,Polymerase chain reaction,DIGFA） to identificate each sample,and taken the Culture and identification method as the control method.Results The positive rate of Gram stained direct smears method was lower than other three metheds（P〈0.05）.Comparison the positive rate of other two methods（DIGFA,Culture and identification）,the difference was not statistical significant（P〈0.05）.The positive rate of PCR was higher than other three metheds（P〈0.05）.Conclusion For diagnosis of clinical microbiology,we suggested that we need to use at least two metheds to increase the positive rate of neisseria gonorrhoeae.

关 键 词：淋病奈瑟菌 直接涂片染色 培养鉴定 聚合酶链反应 斑点金免疫渗滤法 

分 类 号：R446.5[医药卫生—诊断学]