摘要
目的对比分析分别采用酶免疫法(ELISA)、化学发光免疫分析法(CLIA)检测艾滋病(HIV)抗体的效果。方法随机抽查2015年1月—2017年12月在我院进行血液检验筛查出的70例HIV高危患者,分别采用ELISA法、CLIA法检测患者血清HIV抗体,并以蛋白印迹检测法检测结果为标准对比两种检测方法的准确性。结果CLIA法检测阳性率为14.29%,ELISA法为12.86%,两组方法对比,差异不具有统计学意义(P>0.05)。CLIA法和ELISA法的阳性预测值、特异度、灵敏度等对比,差异均不具有统计学意义(P>0.05),但CLIA法检测灵敏度稍高于ELISA法。结论 CLIA法和ELISA法在HIV抗体检测中均具有较高的临床价值,准确性、特异度、灵敏度均相对较高,CLIA法灵敏度相对ELISA法稍高。
Objective To compare the effects of enzyme immunoassay(ELISA)and chemiluminescent immunoassay(CLIA)on the detection of HIV antibody.Methods A random sample of 70 high-risk HIV patients who were screened by blood tests in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2017.HIV antibodies were detected by ELISA and CLIA respectively.The accuracy of the two detection methods was compared by Western blotting.Results The positive rate of CLIA method was 14.29%,and the ELISA method was 12.86%.The difference between the two groups was not statistically significant(P>0.05).There was no statistically significant difference in positive predictive value,specificity and sensitivity between CLIA method and ELISA method(P>0.05).However,the sensitivity of CLIA method was slightly higher than that of ELISA method.Conclusion The CLIA and ELISA methods have high clinical value in the detection of HIV antibody,and the accuracy,specificity and sensitivity are relatively high,and the sensitivity of the CLIA method is slightly higher than that of the ELISA method.
作者
赵华江
ZHAO Huajiang(Clinical Laboratory,Jiangning District Chinese Medicine Hospital,Nanjing Jiangsu 211100,China)
出处
《中国继续医学教育》
2018年第13期25-26,共2页
China Continuing Medical Education
