电化学发光免疫法与放射免疫法检测甲状腺激素结果分析  

Results of detection of thyroid hormone by ECLIA and RIA

作　　者：李三喜[1] 余书勇[1] 陈森良[1] 

机构地区：[1]解放军第187中心医院核医学科,海南海口571159

出　　处：《中国热带医学》2013年第4期508-509,共2页China Tropical Medicine

摘　　要：目的比较电化学发光免疫法(ECLIA)与放射免疫法(RIA)对甲状腺激素的检测效果。方法应用电化学光免疫法与放射免疫法分别检测血清TT3、TT4、TSH、FT3、FT4,并进行均值、相关性、精密度和准确度对比分析。结果两种方法的均值结果差异无统计学意义(分别为3.55±1.08对3.41±1.09、158.03±2.52对157.63±1.90、20.04±0.23对19.99±0.21、7.16±3.36对7.36±3.21、23.57±9.02对21.28±8.08,P均>0.05);TT3和TT4检测结果的两种方法相关有统计学意义(分别为t=3.34和t=12.85,P<0.01);ECLIA法对各指标测定的平均批内及批间变异为1.69%和3.68%,均低于RIA法的3.35%和5.04%;对两种方法的回收率比较,差异有统计学意义(t=7.138,P<0.01),ECLIA法的准确度优于RIA法。结论 ECLIA法的精密度、准确度均优于RIA法,适合于临床应用。Objective To compare the results of detection of thyroid hormone by electrochemiluminescent immunoassay（ECLIA） and Radiation immunoassay（RIA）.Methods Serum TT3,TT4,TSH,FT3 and FT4 in 40 hyperthyroidism cases and healthy controls were detected by ECLIA and RIA.The mean,relativity,precision and accuracy were analyzed.Results The difference of mean between two methods showed no statistically significant differences（3.55±1.08 vs 3.41±1.09,158.03±2.52 vs 157.63±1.90,20.04±0.23 vs 19.99±0.21,7.16±3.36 vs 7.36±3.21 and 23.57±9.02 vs 21.28±8.08,P0.05）.The correlation between two methods was statistically significant in detection of TT3 and TT4（t=3.34and t=12.85,P0.01）.The variations of intrabatch and interbatch in ECLIA（1.69% and 3.68%） were low than that in RIA（3.35% and 5.04%）.The difference of recovery rate between two methods was statistically significant（t=7.138,P0.01）;accuracy of ECLIA was better than that of RIA.Conclusions ECLIA is accurate in diagnosis of hyperthyroidism than RIA and suitable for clinical application.

关 键 词：电化学发光免疫法 放射免疫法 甲状腺激素 

分 类 号：R446.6[医药卫生—诊断学]