磁微粒化学发光法与酶联免疫吸附法测定抗中性粒细胞胞浆抗体的结果比较

目的:比较分析磁微粒化学发光法与酶联免疫吸附法测定抗PR3 抗体、抗MPO 抗体的检测结果。方法:分别采用磁微粒化学发光法(A 方法)和酶联免疫吸附法(B 方法)对166 例自身免疫病患者血清、50 例健康者血清中抗PR3 抗体、抗MPO 抗体进行定量检测,对检测结果进行统计分析。结果:A 方法测定高、中、低质控血清的批内和批间重复性优于B方法,A、B 方法测定质控血清的准确度均符合要求;A、B 方法测定抗PR3 抗体、抗MPO 抗体临床样本的线性相关系数r 分别为0.987 8,0.989 6;A、B 方法的检测结果采用kappa 分析,kappa 系数分别为0.897 和0.882。结论:磁微粒化学发光法(A 方法)测定抗PR3 抗体、抗MPO 抗体优于酶联免疫吸附法(B 方法),更符合临床应用要求。

Comparison of chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for determination of anti-neutrophil cytoplasm antibodies

 Objective:To compare the performance of chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay(CMIA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay(ELISA) for the determination of Anti PR3 and Anti MPO.Methods: Concentration of Anti-PR3 and Anti-MPO in serum samples from 166 patients with autoimmune diseases and 50 healthy donors were determined by using CMIA(Method A) and ELISA(Method B),respectively.The results from both assays were analyzed and compared by statistical methods.Results: Method A showed better intra-assay reproducibility and inter-assay reproducibility than Method B for the determination of high,medium and low levels of control serum.Both methods met the accuracy requirement.The correlation coefficient of Anti-PR3 and Anti-MPO were 0.9878 and 0.989 6 for Method A and Method B,respectively.And the Kappa coefficients were 0.897 and 0.882 for Method A and Method B,respectively.Conclusion: The performance of Method A is superior to Method B for the deter-mination of Anti-PR3 and Anti-MPO,which makes Method A to be a potentially better choice for clinical application.