牛布鲁氏菌四种血清学检测方法的比较
Comparison of 4 Serological Tests for Bovine Brucellosis Detection
  
查看全文  查看/发表评论  下载PDF阅读器
中文摘要:
      [目的]为在布鲁氏菌病临床检疫中选择可靠的血清学检测方法提供参考。[方法]对采集的294份牛血清样品用虎红平板凝集试验(RBT)、试管凝集试验(SAT)、酶联免疫吸附试验(ELISA)和补体结合试验(CFT)进行布鲁氏菌病抗体检测,比较RBT与ELISA,SAT与CFT的符合率及Kappa值,以CFT作为判定标准,比较四种检测方法的敏感性和特异性。[结果] RBT与ELISA、SAT与CFT检测方法的符合率高达到95%以上,且Kappa值均大于0.75。以CFT作为判定标准,RBT和ELISA的敏感性较好,但有假阳性;SAT的特异性较好,但有假阴性。综合比较认为ELISA的敏感性和特异性都比较理想。[结论]临床工作中使用RBT或ELISA对布鲁氏菌病进行初筛,用CFT进行复核确诊,通过两种或两种以上的血清学检测方法联合诊断,结果较为理想。
英文摘要:
      In order to provide a reference for choosing an appropriate serological test method for bovine brucellosis in clinical detection,4 serological tests for bovine brucellosis detection were compared and analyzed. 294 bovine serum samples were tested by Rose Bengal Plate Agglutination Test (RBT),Serum Agglutination Test(SAT),Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay(ELISA)and Complement Fixation Test(CFT),respectively. The coincidence rate and Kappa were compared between RBT and ELISA,SAT and CFT,respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of the 4 tests were compared using CFT as a standard. The coincidence rate of RBT and ELISA,SAT and CFT was over 95% as well as the Kappa values > 0.75. Taking CFT as a standard,the sensitivity of RBT and ELISA was better,but it exised a certain false positive. The specificity of SAT was better,but it existed a certain false negative. ELISA had better sensitivity and specificity than RBT and SAT. RBT and ELISA were suitable for screening,and CFT was suitable for definite diagnosing in clinical detection. It was better to choose more than two tests for diagnosis of bovine brucellosis.
作者单位
任璐,周晓翠,范伟兴,武瑞  
中文关键词:  牛布鲁氏菌病  RBT  SAT  ELISA  CFT,比较
英文关键词:bovine brucellosis  RBT  SAT  ELISA  comparison
基金项目:
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-944X.2016.03.025
关闭

“中国兽医发布”微信公众号
以下是在线客服