两种免疫荧光方法检测肺炎衣原体抗体的比较  

Comparison of two immunofluorescence methods for the determination of antibodies against chlamydia pneumoniae

作　　者：吴向辉[1] 操乐杰[2] 张小玲[3] 

机构地区：[1]安徽省立医院中心实验室,合肥230001 [2]安徽省立医院呼吸内科,合肥230001 [3]安徽省立医院心血管内科,合肥230001

出　　处：《上海医学检验杂志》2002年第4期221-223,共3页Shanghai Journal of Medical Laboratory Sciences

摘　　要：目的　比较研究两种免疫荧光技术检测抗肺炎衣原体 (Cpn)特异性抗体的方法学 ,以选择一种适合国内医院开展的技术。方法　应用间接免疫荧光滴定平板技术和微量免疫荧光 (MIF)试验对 171例患者进行了Cpn特异性IgG、IgA、IgM抗体的检测。 结果　两种方法无论是方法学还是特异性、敏感性均无明显的差异 ,但间接免疫荧光滴定平板检测结果的荧光模型清晰、易辨认。Objective To compare two immunofluorescence methods for the determination of antibodies against chlamydia pneumoniae (Cpn) in order to choose a technique suitable for Chinese hospitals. Methods The Cpn specific IgG, IgA and IgM were measured by the indirect immunofluorescence Titerplate technique and the microimmunofluorescence test in 171 patients with respiratory disease, coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction. Results There were no significant differences between the two immunofluorescence methods in regard to methodology, specificity or sensitivity. The reagents used in the Titerplate technique are now available in the market, in addition, the resulted pattern is clear. Conclusion The indirect immunofluorescence Titerplate technique is suitable for Chinese hospitals to measure Cpn specific serum antibodies.

关 键 词：免疫荧光方法 检测 肺炎衣原体 抗体 诊断 呼吸系统感染性疾病 

分 类 号：R56[医药卫生—呼吸系统] R446.6[医药卫生—内科学]