酶联免疫法与胶体金法检测肺炎衣原体IgM抗体抗干扰能力的比较

目的:评价酶联免疫法和胶体金法用于肺炎衣原体IgM抗体(CP-IgM)检测抗干扰能力的差异。方法:检测方法的优劣一定程度上源于该方法抗干扰能力的强弱,体现在准确率、敏感性、特异性等相关指标上,选取219例临床疑为肺炎衣原体感染患者血清作为研究样本,分别采用酶联免疫法和胶体金法检测肺炎衣原体IgM抗体。比较两种方法检测结果的真阳性例数、真阴性例数、假阳性例数、假阴性例数,并计算两种方法相应的准确率、敏感性、特异性,进而评价两种检测方法的抗干扰能力。结果:酶联免疫法检测肺炎衣原体IgM抗体比胶体金法的真阳性例数与真阴性例数多;而假阳性例数和假阴性例数均少;酶联免疫法的准确率、敏感性、特异性均高于胶体金法(P<0.05)。结论:酶联免疫法检测肺炎衣原体IgM抗体的抗干扰能力比胶体金法更强,检测结果准确性更高。

Comparison of Anti-Jamming Ability of Chlamydia Pneumoniae IgM Antibody Detected by Enzyme-Linked Immunization Assay and Colloidal Gold Assay

Objective:To evaluate the difference in the anti-interference ability of enzyme-linked immunization assay(ELISA)and colloidal gold assay in the detection of chlamydia pneumoniae(CP)IgM antibody.Methods:To some extent,the advantages and disadvantages of the detection method come from the strong and weak anti-interference ability of the method,reflected in the accuracy,sensitivity,specificity and other relevant indicators,serum samples from 219 patients with suspected chlamydia pneumoniae infection were selected as study samples and elisa and gold colloidal assay were used to detect IgM antibody of chlamydia pneumoniae.The number of true positive,true negative,false positive and false negative was compared between the two methods.The accuracy,sensitivity and specificity of the two methods were calculated to evaluate their anti-interference ability.Results:The number of true positive and true negative cases of chlamydia pneumoniae IgM antibody detected by enzyme-linked immunoassay was higher than that by colloidal gold assay.However,the number of false positive cases and false negative cases were small.The accuracy,sensitivity and specificity of ELISA were higher than those of colloidal gold(P<0.05).Conclusion:The anti-interference ability of CP-IgM detected by ELISA is better than that by colloidal gold method,and the detection result is more accurate.