酶联免疫吸附试验法和胶体金标法检测HBsAg对比分析

目的 通过用酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）法筛选出血中乙型肝炎表面抗原（HBsAg）阳性标本,同时用胶体金标法检测,比较2种方法检测HBsAg的临床应用价值.方法 将ELISA法检测阳性的标本按S/OD值不同分为A～D组,比较2种方法检测结果的差异.结果 632例ELISA法HBsAg阳性标本,A组（1.0≤S/OD≤6.9）56例,胶体金标法检出5例,检出率为8.93%（5/56）;B组（6.9〈S/OD≤12.8）60例;C组（12.8〈S/OD≤25.0）510例;D组（〉25.0）6例,胶体金标法均检出,检出率为100.00%.低浓度组（A组）HBsAg 2种检测方法结果比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）.结论 ELISA法检测HBsAg有较好的灵敏度和特异性,具有较宽的检测范围,胶体金标法检测下限较高,灵敏度较低,易造成部分弱阳性标本漏检,不宜用于临床HBsAg检测.

Comparative analysis of ELISA and GICA in detecting HBsAg

Objective Through screening the positive samples of HBsAg in blood by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay （ELISA） and detecting by gold immunoehromatography （GICA） simultaneously, to compare the clinical practice value of ELISA and GICA in examining HBsAg. Methods According to the S/OD value,the positive samples were divided into four groups by ELISA ： A to D. The difference of testing results of the two methods were compared. Results Among the 632 positive specimens of HBsAg screened by ELISA, group A （1.0 ≤ S/OD ≤ 6.9） was with 56 cases, 5 case of which were detected by GICA, with the detection rate of 8.93% （5/56） ; group B （6.9〈S/OD≤ 12.8 ） was with 60 cases ; group C （ 12.8〈S/OD ≤ 25.0） was with 510 cases and group D （〉25.0） was with 6 cases, all of which were detected by GICA, with the detection rate of 100.00%. The comparison of the two methods in detecting HBsAg in low density group （group A） had statistically significant difference （P〈0.01）. Conclusion ELISA has a better sensitivity and the specificity to detect HBsAg with wider examination scope ,while GICA has higher detection limits and lower sensitivity,which is easy to skip over parts of weakly positive samples, so GICA is not suitable for the clinical examination.