[1]王伟,袁君,李娜,等.输血前患者传染病检测为弱阳性结果的准确性探讨[J].医学研究与战创伤救治(原医学研究生学报),2021,23(05):471-474.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2021.05.005]
WANG Wei,YUAN Jun,LI Na,et al.Discussion on the accuracy of weak positive results of infectious disease detection in patients before blood transfusion[J].JOURNAL OF MEDICALRESEARCH —COMBAT TRAUMA CARE,2021,23(05):471-474.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2021.05.005]
点击复制
输血前患者传染病检测为弱阳性结果的准确性探讨(
)
WANG Wei,YUAN Jun,LI Na,et al.Discussion on the accuracy of weak positive results of infectious disease detection in patients before blood transfusion[J].JOURNAL OF MEDICALRESEARCH —COMBAT TRAUMA CARE,2021,23(05):471-474.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.1672-271X.2021.05.005]
)《医学研究与战创伤救治》（原医学研究生学报）[ISSN:1672-271X/CN:32-1713/R]
- 卷:
- 第23卷
- 期数:
- 2021年05
- 页码:
- 471-474
- 栏目:
- 临床研究
- 出版日期:
- 2021-09-20
文章信息/Info
- Title:
- Discussion on the accuracy of weak positive results of infectious disease detection in patients before blood transfusion
- Keywords:
- four tests for infectious diseases; neutralization test; western blot; weak reactivity; review
- 分类号:
- R446.5
- 文献标志码:
- A
- 摘要:
- 目的探讨酶联免疫吸附试验（ELISA）检测输血前患者传染病四项（HBsAg、抗-HCV、抗-TP、抗-HIV）为弱阳性结果的准确性。方法对东部战区总医院输血医学科142份传染病四项弱阳性标本，分别用中和实验对HBsAg和免疫印迹实验对抗-HCV、抗-HIV、抗-TP进行确证检测，并回顾性跟踪统计一段时间内166例初次检测为弱反应性患者的ELISA复查结果。结果传染病四项标本ELISA方法检测的样本值与临界值（Sample/cut off, S/CO）的比值在1.0~3.0之间，其阴性率分别为41.67%、93.33%、85.71%、20.00%；S/CO值在3.0~5.0之间，其阴性率分别为13.33%、83.33%、100.00%、0.00%；S/CO值5.0~7.0以上，其阴性率分别为8.33%、75.00%、100.00%、0.00%。166例为弱反应性的标本用ELISA复查后，传染病四项转阴率分别为11.62%、55.56%、100.00%、16.67%。结论传染病四项检测结果为弱阳存在很大比例假阳性率，且随着S/CO值的增高，假阳性比例逐渐减少且跟踪复查患者的转阴率也明显下降。
- Abstract:
- ObjectiveTo investigate the accuracy of the results of weak-positive specimens of infectious disease test (HBsAg, anti-HCV, anti-TP, anti-HIV) in patients before blood transfusion.MethodsA total of 142 weak-positive specimens of four tests for infectious diseases in the Blood Transfusion Department of the Eastern Theater General Hospital were investigated by neutralizing experiments with HBsAg and western blotting with anti-HCV, anti-HIV and anti-TP, and retrospectively count the ELISA test results of 166 cases of weakly reactive patients tested for the first time in a period of time.ResultsThe ELISA assay for specimens of four tests for infectious diseases detected S/CO values between 1.0 and 3.0, and the negative rates were 41.67%, 93.33%, 85.71%, 20%, respectively. The S/CO value was between 3.0 and 5.0, and the negative rates were 13.33%, 83.33%, 100.00%, 0.00%, respectively. And the S/CO values were 5.0-7.0, the negative rates were 8.33%, 75.00%, 100.00%, and 0%, respectively. The negative conversion rates of 166 cases followed up for review were 11.62%, 55.56%, 100.00%, and 16.67%, respectively.ConclusionThe results of four tests for infectious diseases have a large proportion of false positives in weak-positive, and with the increase of S/CO value, the proportion of false positives gradually decreases and the rate of negative conversion of patients who follow the review is also significantly decreased.
参考文献/References:
[1]符小玲，徐春柳，蔡兴权，等.输血前检查受血者传染性疾病感染指标及临床意义分析[J].中华医院感染学杂志，2018，28(16)：2498-2501.
[2]Uchida S，Satake M，Kurisu A，et al.Incidence rates of hepatitis C virus infection among blood donors in Japan:a nationwide retrospective cohort study[J].Transfusion，2018，58(12) ：2880-2885.
[3]沈国栋，谭伟龙.新型冠状病毒肺炎流行期间军队医疗机构面临的采供血和输血风险与安全防护[J].东南国防医药，2020，22(4)：342-345.
[4]陈鹏，蔡玲，孔令芸.临床输血技术规范研究[J].临床医药文献电子杂志，2017，4(10)：1872.
[5]范许洲，王伟，杨晓丽，等.2008-2017年驻苏皖部队无偿献血者检测结果分析[J].东南国防医药，2019，21(5)：555-557.
[6]丁卫平，李晶.人抗鼠抗体干扰导致献血者HBsAg、HIV酶免检测假阳性1例[J].临床输血与检验，2017，19(4)：404-405.
[7]唐慧娴，王长军，张琪.CRISPR/Cas9技术用于清除乙型肝炎病毒的研究进展[J].医学研究生学报，2017，30(8)：865-868.
[8]Xu WZ，Li Y，Wu Q，et al.Brief Communication:Comparison the Diagnostic Performance of Four HBsAg ELISA Kits[J].J Clin Lab Anal，2013，27(4)：294-296.
[9]邬林枫，曾劲峰，孙元璋，等.化学发光微粒子免疫测定技术对低风险人群HCV感染确证的应用价值[J].国际检验医学杂志，2017，38(10)：1301-1303.
[10]贺鹃，喻晶.HBV感染肝癌患者伴HIV抗体不确定结果1例[J].中国艾滋病性病，2020，26(8)：891-892.
[11]马仲慧，陈兵，常浩，等.非HIV感染者蛋白印迹试验不确定及假阳性结果的原因[J].中国艾滋病性病，2017，23(6):571-574.
[12]黄秋芳，潘海西，栾苑，等.南宁市无偿献血人群HIV抗体初筛有反应确认结果分析[J].中国卫生检验杂志，2020，30(22)：2708-2710.
[13]殷红莲,汤国宁,韦启飞,等.27 864例HIV抗体筛查结果及阳性标本确诊结果分析[J].中国社区医师,2019,35(22):108-109.
[14]张瑞芳，高丽华，董宇青，等.对比分析不同梅毒检验方法在梅毒螺旋体检测中的临床效果[J].中国性科学，2016，25(5):90-92.
[15]李楠，孙萍萍，王翠，等.3种血清学特异性抗体检测在梅毒螺旋体检测中的比较研究[J].中国实验诊断学，2021，25(1)：64-66.
[16]张文静.基于血清学的梅毒假阳性的相关因素检验研究[J].国际检验医学杂志，2016，37(10):1362-1367.
[17]莫艳萍.免疫印迹法和TPPA在献血者梅毒确认方法中比较[J].临床血液学杂志(输血与检验)，2015，28(3)：536-538.
[18]刘晓华，林月好，李纯，等.ELISA与ECLIA对HBsAg弱反应性标本检测的比较[J].临床医学工程，2011，18(10)：1544-1546.
[19]胡晓玲，汪新民.输血前检查HBsAg弱阳性结果分析[J].临床输血与检验，2016，18(2)：180.
[20]Mortti M，Pieretti B，Masucci A，et al.Role of signal-to-cutoff ratios in hepatitis C virus antibody detection[J]. Clin Vaccine Immunol，2012，19(8)：1329-1331.
[21]Wu SJ，Liu Y，Cheng L.Clinical evaluation of the signal-to-cutoff ratios of hepatitis C virus antibody screening tests used in China[J]. J Med Virol，2011，83(11)：1930-1937.
[22]任芙蓉，龚晓燕，李京京，等.献血员丙型肝炎病毒抗体酶免疫法检测试剂的测量值与其真阳性的相关性[J].中华肝脏病杂志，2005，13(4)：27-30.
相似文献/References:
备注/Memo
- 备注/Memo:
- 基金项目：全军重大课题（ANJ13J001）
常用功能
统计/Statistics
- 摘要浏览/Viewed245
- 全文下载/Downloads179
- 评论/Comments
