摘要
目的 探讨肾综合征出血热 (HFRS)早期诊断方法。方法 用MacELISA、IFAT二种方法同时检测HFRS病人血清40份 ;非出血热血清20份 ;正常人血清20份进行对比研究。而且 ,阳性血清用2 -巯基乙醇破坏特异性IgM试验 ,阴性血清加类风湿因子阳性血清干扰试验。 结果 用MacELISA法检测HFRS于病程第2日即可出现特异性IgM阳性 ,3～4病日阳性率达89 % ;5～7病日阳性率达100% ,而IFAT法时病日抗体阳性率为55%与70% (P<0.05)。非出血热病人与正常人特异性抗体全部阴性。阳性血清用2 -巯基乙醇破坏IgM后MacELISA检测为阴性 ,阴性血清加类风湿阳性血清后用本法检测无假阳性。结论 两法相比 ,MacELISA法诊断HFRS特异性强 ,灵敏度高 。
Objective To explore the early diagnosis approaches of the hemorrhagic fever with renal syndrome (HFRS). Methods 40 serum samples ( 20 HFRS positive and another 20 as the control) were detected by using Mac ELISA and IFAT. 2-ME was used to destroy the specific IgM in the HFRS positive samples while in the control samples rheumatic factor was added. Results Specific IgM was detected at the second day of HFRS cases with ELISA. At the third and fourth day, the IgM detection rate was 89% and 100% at the fifth and seventh day. While with IFAT, the detection rate was 55% and 70% (P<0.05). No positive response was detected in the normal cases. When 2-ME was added into the positive serum , it also showed negative response with ELISA. False positive response was revealed when the rheumatic factor was added the negative serum samples. Conclusion When compared, ELISA was more sensitive and specific in the eailg diagnosis of the HFRS than IFAT.
出处
《浙江临床医学》
2000年第11期742-743,共2页
Zhejiang Clinical Medical Journal
