首页|3种方法学检测抗核抗体谱结果分析

3种方法学检测抗核抗体谱结果分析

扫码查看
目的 探索目前实验室常用3种方法学检测抗核抗体谱结果的差异与一致性.方法 从本院诊断自身免疫病(autoimmune disease,AID)的患者中留取97例样本作为AID组,体检健康人群留取43例样本作为对照组.本研究采用多数实验室常用的间接免疫荧法(indirect immunofluorescence assay,IIF)、线性免疫印迹法(line immunoassay,LIA)、磁条码免疫荧光发光法(magnetic bar code immunofluorescence assay,MBC)分别检测两组血清样本中的抗核抗体(antinuclear antibody,ANA),LIA和MBC可检测ANA 15种抗体,利用x2检验、Kappa检验进行3法分别在两组间阳性率的比较,AID组3法之间的阳性率比较,LIA法和MBC法检测AID组ANA分别15种抗体阳性率的比较和结果一致性的分析.结果 3种方法检测的AID组ANA阳性检出率均显著高于健康对照组(P<0.05),检测AID组ANA3种方法之间的阳性率之间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).LIA法和MBC法检测AID组AN A15种抗体结果分析,差异性比较中2项差异有统计学意义,一致性分析中有1项一致性差,6项一致性一般,7项一致性好.结论 3种主流方法均有好的阳性检出率,LIA法和MBC法检测ANA15项总一致性较好,但抗CENP-B抗体一致性较差,与IIF法核型(着丝点型)比对,该项用LIA法检出率显著高于MBC法且IIF法是不可替代的经典,应结合实验室的情况和临床安排合适的检测方案综合判断减少漏诊和过度诊断.
A Comparative Analysis of Three Different Methods for Detecting Anti-nuclear Antibodies
Objective The current study aims to evaluate and compare the performances of indirect immunofluorescence assay(IIF),line immunoassay(LIA),and magnetic bar code immunofluorescence assay(MBC)to detect anti-nuclear antibodies(ANAs),including performance difference and consistency.Methods A total of 97 samples from autoimmune disease(AID)patients and 43 samples from healthy individuals in Shijingshan Hospital were collected for the study.IIf,LIA and MBC methods were used to detect ANA in serum samples of these two groups(fifteen anti-nuclear antibodies were detected by LIA and MBC methods).x2 text and Kappa tests were used to compare the positive detection rates of these two groups by three assays and the positive detection rates of these three methods in AID group.We then evaluated the difference and the consistency of the fifteen ANAs items'positive results by comparing between LIA and MBC methods.Results The positive detection rates of AID group patients of the three assays were significantly higher than the those of the control group.In the AID group,the differences were not statistically significant when comparing the positive rates of ANA by the three methods.In the analysis of the 15 antibodies detected in the AID group by LIA and MBC,differences were statistically significant in 2 items,with one poor consistency,six fair consistencies and seven good consistencies.Conclusion The positive detection rates of ANA are high among the three assays.The total consistency of ANA-15 results between LIA and MBC methods is acceptable except the poor consistency in anti-CENP-B antibody item detection.The positive detection rate of anti-CENP-B antibody by LIA is higher than the one by MBC combined with the fluorescent centromere pattern.Proper assays should be arranged according to specific situations of the laboratory in order to avoid missed diagnosis and over-treatment,and IIF can still play an important role in labs as a classical gold standard method.

Autoimmune diseaseAntinuclear antibodyIndirect immunofluorescence assayLine immunoassayMagnetic bar code immunofluorescence assay

李晔、李晓松、李梅、李旭艳、王楷、刘兵兵、孟宇

展开 >

首都医科大学石景山教学医院北京市石景山医院检验科,北京 100043

首都医科大学石景山教学医院北京市石景山医院风湿免疫科,北京 100043

首都医科大学石景山教学医院北京市石景山医院皮肤科,北京 100043

自身免疫性疾病 抗核抗体谱 间接免疫荧光法 免疫印迹法 磁条码免疫荧光发光法

2024

标记免疫分析与临床
中国同辐股份有限公司

标记免疫分析与临床

CSTPCD
影响因子:0.978
ISSN:1006-1703
年,卷(期):2024.31(11)