期刊文献+

两种检测抗双链DNA抗体方法对系统性红斑狼疮的诊断价值比较 被引量:12

Two tests to detect anti-double stranded DNA antibodies in the diagnostic value of systemic lupus erythematosus
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的探讨间接免疫荧光法(IIF)和酶联免疫吸附法(ELISA)同时检测对于系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)诊断的价值。方法回顾性研究,回顾北京大学第一医院2011年6月1日至9月30日所有抗dsDNA抗体检测的病例2712例,记录每份病例的抗dsDNA抗体检测结果及其临床诊断。计算IIF和ELISA方法检测敏感度、特异度,运用Kappa检验进行一致性检验。结果ELISA方法检测抗dsDNA抗体的阳性率(16.3%)要略高于IIF方法(13.1%),但二者的总体结果基本一致(Kappa=0.641,P〈0.05)。在不一致(9.2%)中以IIF法阴性同时ELISA法阳性多见(6.2%)。以SLE的临床诊断为金标准,IIF与ELISA检测结果诊断SLE的准确性分别为84.8%和84.4%,差异无统计学意义(χ2=0.25,P〉0.05)。IIF诊断SLE的敏感度和特异度为46.1%和99.2%,ELISA诊断SLE的敏感度和特异度为51.3%和96.7%。结论应将IIF和ELISA2种方法同时应用于抗dsDNA抗体的检测。若先用ELISA筛查,阳性标本再加测IIF,会将至少3.0%的ELISA阴性IIF阳性标本误判为阴性。IIF阴性ELISA阳性标本应进一步检测抗dsDNA抗体亲和力来辅助SLE的诊断和病情评估。 Objective To investigate the concurrent application value of indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Methods A retrospective study. All patients who took anti-double stranded DNA (dsDNA) antibody test from June 1 2011 to September 30 2011 in our department were recruited in this study. The patients' anti-dsDNA antibody results and clinical diagnosis were collected and analyzed retrospectively. The consistence, sensitivity and specificity of IIF and ELISA tests were calculated and the consistence was compared by Kappa test. Results The positive rates of detecting anti-dsDNA antibodies by ELISA and IIF tests were 16.3% and 13.1% respectively. The consistency between these two tests was 90. 8%, and showed good correlation by Kappa test ( Kappa = 0. 641, P 〈 0. 05 ). Of 9. 2% of inconsistent results between IIF and ELISA, most eases (6. 2% ) were ELISA positive and IIF negative. Taking the clinical diagnosis of lupus as a golden standard, the accuracy of IIF and ELISA was 84. 8% and 84. 4% respectively and the difference was no significant (X2 = 0. 25, P 〉 0. 05 ). The sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing lupus by IIF were 46. 1% and 99. 2% , and 51.3% and 96. 7% by ELISA. Conclusions Our results suggested that anti-dsDNA antibodies in samples should be detected by both ELISA and IIF tests sinmhaneously. If ELISA was used first and the positive samples were further tested by IIF, at least 3% of ELISA negative and IIF positive samples would be misdiagnosed as anti-dsDNA antibodies negative. IIF negative and ELISA positive samples should be further analyzed the affinity of anti-dsDNA antibodies in order to help the diagnosis and evaluation of SLE.
出处 《中华检验医学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2012年第8期742-745,共4页 Chinese Journal of Laboratory Medicine
关键词 间接免疫荧光 酶联免疫吸附 红斑狼疮 Indirect immunofluorescence Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay Systemic lupus erythematosus
  • 相关文献

参考文献14

  • 1Tan EM, Cohen AS, Fries JF, et al. The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). Arthritis Rheum, 1982, 25 : 1271-1277. 被引量:1
  • 2Hochberg MC. Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Rheum, 1997, 40:1725. 被引量:1
  • 3Vitali C, Bombardieri S, Jonsson R, et al. Classification criteria for Sjogren's syndrome: a revised version of the European criteria proposed by the American-European Consensus Group. Ann Rheum Dis ,2002,61:554-558. 被引量:1
  • 4Arnett FC, Edworthy SM, Bloch DA, et al. The american rheumatism association 1987 revised criteria for the classification of rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum, 1988, 31:315-324. 被引量:1
  • 5Subcommittee for Scleroderma Criteria of the American Rheumatism Association Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee. Preliminary criteria for the classification of systemic sclerosis. Arthritis Rheum, 1980, 23:581-586. 被引量:1
  • 6Jaekel HP, Trabandt A, Grobe N, et al. Anti-dsDNA antibody subtypes and anti-C1 q antibodies:toward a more reliable diagnosis and monitoring of systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis. Lupus, 2006, 15:335-345. 被引量:1
  • 7Chiaro TR, Davis KW, Wilson A, et al. Significant differences in the analytic concordance between anti-dsDNA IgG antibody assays for the diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus-Implications for inter-laboratory testing. Clin Chim Acta, 2011, 412 : 1076-1080. 被引量:1
  • 8史晓敏,冯珍如,隋宝环,阎振林,董宁.酶联免疫吸附试验检测人血清抗双链DNA抗体在系统性红斑狼疮诊断中的性能评估[J].中国全科医学,2011,14(2):167-170. 被引量:20
  • 9Biesen R, Dahnrich C, Rosemann A, et al. Anti-dsDNA-NcX ELISA : dsDNA-loaded nucleosomes improve diagnosis and monitoring of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus. Arthritis Res Ther, 2011,13 : R26. 被引量:1
  • 10Janyapoon K, Jivakanont P, Surbrsing R, et al. Detection of anti- dsDNA by ELISA using different sources of antigens. Pathology, 2005, 37:63-68. 被引量:1

二级参考文献7

  • 1Tan EM,Cohen AS,Fries JF,et al.The 1982 revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)[J].Arthritis Rheum,1982,25:1271-1277. 被引量:1
  • 2Hochberg MC.Updating the American College of Rheumatology revised criteria for the classification of systemic lupus erythematosus[J].Arthritis Rheum,1997,40(9):1725. 被引量:1
  • 3Jaekel HP,Trabandt A,Grobe N,et al.Anti-dsDNA antibody subtypes and anti-C1q antibodies:toward a more reliable diagnosis and monitoring of systemic lupus erythematosus and lupus nephritis[J].Lupus,2006,15(3):335-345. 被引量:1
  • 4Avina-Zubieta JA,Galindo-Rodriguez G,Kwan-Yeung L,et al.Clinical evaluation of various selected ELISA kits for the detection of anti-DNA antibodies[J].Lupus,1995,4:370-374. 被引量:1
  • 5Spronk PE,Limburg PC,Kallenberg CG.Serological markers of disease activity in systemic lupus erythematosus[J].Lupus,1995,4:86-94. 被引量:1
  • 6Werle E,Blazek M,Fiehn W.The clinical significance of measuring different anti-dsDNA antibodies by using the Farr assay,an enzyme immunoassay and a crithidia luciliae immunofluorescence test[J].Lupus,1992,1:369-377. 被引量:1
  • 7Arbuckle MR,James JA,Kohlhase KF,et al.Development of anti-dsDNA autoantibodies prior to clinical diagnosis of systemic lupus erythematosus[J].Scand J Immunol,2001,54 (1-2):211-219. 被引量:1

共引文献19

同被引文献83

引证文献12

二级引证文献63

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部