牛羊布鲁氏菌病四种血清学检测方法对比分析  

Comparison of 4 Serological Assays for Detection of Bovine and Ovine Brucellosis

作　　者：齐景文[1] 依颖新[1] 周艳红[1] 雷蕾[1] 杨蕴力[1] 李祺[1] 

机构地区：[1]沈阳市动物疫病预防控制中心,辽宁沈阳110034

出　　处：《中国动物检疫》2015年第4期57-59,共3页China Animal Health Inspection

摘　　要：[目的 ]对布鲁氏菌病的几种检测方法进行比对分析,为国家标准修订提供参考。[方法 ]对收集到的669份血清样本用虎红平板凝集试验(RBT)、试管凝集试验(SAT)、补体结合试验(CFT)和酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)方法进行检测,比较四种检测方法的一致性、敏感性与特异性。[结果 ]RBT、SAT、CFT、ELISA四种牛羊布鲁菌病的血清学检测方法一致率较高,Kappa值均大于或等于0.75。RBT敏感性较高,CFT特异性好,而SAT有一定的假阳性和假阴性,ELISA的敏感性和特异性都比较理想。[结论 ]用RBT初筛,用CFT和ELISA联合诊断结果较为理想。[Objective] Four diagnostic methods were compared in order to provide reference for revising the state standard for brucellosis detection. [ Method] 669 serum samples were collected and tested by using Rose Bengal plate agglutination test（RBT）,serum agglutination test（SAT）,complement fixation test（CFT） and enzyme linked immunosorbent assay（ELISA）. The consistency,sensitivity and specificity of the four assays were compared. [Result] The consistency of RBT,SAT,CFT and ELISA in detection of bovine and ovine brucellosis was quite high,with a Kappa value ≧ 0.75. RBT had a higher sensitivity,CFT had a better specificity,and SAT yielded certain false positives and false negatives. ELISA was both sensitive and specific. [Conclusion] It would be more satisfactory that RBT was firstly used for screening,and CFT and ELISA were used in combination for diagnosis of bovine and ovine brucellosis.

关 键 词：布鲁氏菌病 RBT SAT CFT ELISA 牛 羊 

分 类 号：S852.53[农业科学—基础兽医学]