【摘要】 目的:比较梅毒螺旋体抗体ELISA与RPR、TPPA试验,并对检测结果进行综合分析,选择适合采供血机构筛检梅毒的方法。方法:选用ELISA方法在无偿献血者筛检中产生的50例梅毒抗体阳性标本,分别进行梅毒螺旋体抗体酶联免疫试验(TP-ELISA)、血浆反应素环状卡片试验(RPR)以及梅毒螺旋体血球凝集试验(TPPA),将检测结果进行综合分析。结果:ELISA-1、ELISA-2、RPR法的灵敏度分别为100%、100%、44%;假阳性率分别为4%、60%、0;漏检率分别为0、0、56%。TPPA法与RPR法检测结果之间有显著性差异,TPPA法与ELISA-2法检测结果之间有显著性差异,TPPA法与ELISA-1法之间无显著性差异。结论:ELISA-1法适用于大批量的血液筛查,但此法可能会造成检测结果出现一定程度的假阳性,采用TPPA法再进行确证,有利于血液质量安全。更多还原

【Abstract】 Objective:To compare the Treponema pallidum antibody ELISA and RPR,TPPA test and a comprehensive analysis of test results,select syphilis screening for blood collection and supply agencies.Metaods:ELISA method in screening blood donors in 50 cases of syphilis have the antibody-positive specimens,respectively Treponema pallidum antibody ELISA (TP-ELISA),plasma-response test card ring (RPR) and the Treponema pallidum hemagglutination Test (TPPA),will conduct a comprehensive analysis of test results.Results:ELISA-1, ELISA-2,RPR sensitivity of the method were 100%、100%、44%;false positive rates were 4%、60%、0;missed were 0、 0、56%.TPPA Law and the Law RPR test results have significant differences,TPPA law and ELISA-2 assay results were significantly different,TPPA law and ELISA-1 between the law was no significant difference.Conclusion:ELISA-1 law applicable to high-volume blood screening,but this method may cause the results of testing a certain degree of false positives,TPPA method used to conduct a confirmation that is conducive to the quality and safety of the blood.更多还原