梅毒血清学试剂性能评估方案的优化及应用

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2014.11.021

检验医学 ›› 2014, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (11): 1169-1174.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8640.2014.11.021

• 技术研究与评价·论著 • 上一篇下一篇

梅毒血清学试剂性能评估方案的优化及应用

顾伟鸣¹，杨阳¹，吴磊¹，郭玮²，宋斌斌²，邓安梅³，王庆忠⁴

1.上海市皮肤病医院，上海 200443；2.复旦大学附属中山医院，上海 200032；3. 第二军医大学附属长海医院，上海 200433；4.上海市临床检验中心，上海 200126

收稿日期:2014-06-12 出版日期:2014-11-01 发布日期:2014-11-28
作者简介:顾伟鸣，男，1962年生，硕士，副主任技师，主要从事性病实验诊断与实验室管理研究。
基金资助:
上海市科委择优委托项目(09DZ1907104); 卫生标准专业委员会委托项目(20120905)

Optimization and application of performance evaluation protocol for syphilis serologic assays

GU Weiming¹, YANG Yang¹, WU Lei¹, GUO Wei², SONG Binbin², DENG Anmei³, WANG Qingzhong⁴

1.Shanghai Skin Disease Hospital, Shanghai 200443, China;
2. Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai 200032, China;
3. Changhai Hospital, the Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China;
4.Shanghai Center for Clinical Laboratory, Shanghai 200126, China

Received:2014-06-12 Online:2014-11-01 Published:2014-11-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

目的　制定优化的梅毒血清学试剂的评估方案，探讨新方案在发现试剂检测性能特征的价值。方法　优化的评估方案首次引入最低检出限、抗干扰性、稳定性等技术参数，采用国际抗梅毒标准血清进行测量值溯源，选择国产梅毒血清学试剂及相对应的进口试剂共6种，以多中心方式进行检测性能的评价。结果　456例明确诊断样品的定性试验，梅毒免疫层析法结果与诊断100%符合；其它4种梅毒筛查试剂相互间虽然敏感性和特异性差异无统计学意义，但存在不同程度的假阳性和假阴性；最低检测限浓度由高到低分别是筛查试剂、梅毒螺旋体凝集法、免疫层析法、和酶联免疫法/化学发光法；两种促凝真空采血器96.88%干扰筛查试剂。结论　国产梅毒血清学试剂的检测性能媲美进口产品。免疫层析试剂与临床诊断高度符合，且敏感性水平超过了传统的方法，为推广应用奠定了基础。新的梅毒血清学试剂的评估方案，更完整地反映以往被忽略的影响因素。

关键词: 梅毒, 血清学, 检测性能, 评估方案, 即时检验, 最低检测限

Abstract:

Objective　To design and optimize performance evaluation protocol for syphilis serologic assays， and to investigate the significance of new protocol for discovering the characteristics of assay performance. Methods　Technical parameters， such as lower limit of detection， interference and stability were introduced firstly into the optimized performance evaluation protocol， and 6 domestic and imported assay reagents for syphilis serology were evaluated according to the protocol by multi-center joint study. Results　The qualitative test for 456 definite specimens showed 100% agreement result between point-of-care testing and clinical diagnostic test， and exhibited various degrees of false positive and false negative results among the other 4 screening assays， although their sensitivity and specificity had no statistical difference. The lower limits of detection of the reagents descended from high to low in the order of screening assays were treponema pallidum particle agglutination assay， point-of-care testing and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay/chemiluminescence immunoassay. Two brands of procoagulant vacuum blood collection tubes interfered with non-specific antibody detection reagent for syphilis in a 96.88% proportion. Conclusions　The study shows that the performance of domestic syphilis serologic assays is comparable with that of imported ones. The result by point-of-care testing exhibits a high agreement with clinical diagnostic test result， and its sensitivity is better than that of the traditional method， which lays a foundation for spreading in clinical application. The optimized performance evaluation protocol for syphilis serologic assays would reflect assay performance better.

Key words: Syphilis serology, Assay performance, Evaluation protocol, Point-of-care testing, Lower limit of detection

中图分类号:

R446.11

顾伟鸣，杨阳，吴磊，郭玮，宋斌斌，邓安梅，王庆忠. 梅毒血清学试剂性能评估方案的优化及应用[J]. 检验医学, 2014, 29(11): 1169-1174.

GU Weiming, YANG Yang, WU Lei, GUO Wei, SONG Binbin, DENG Anmei, WANG Qingzhong. Optimization and application of performance evaluation protocol for syphilis serologic assays[J]. , 2014, 29(11): 1169-1174.

参考文献

[1] 王千秋,张国成. 性传播疾病临床诊断指南 [M]. 上海:上海科学技术出版社,2007:2-16.
[2] Galvin SR,Cohen MS. The role of sexually transmitted diseases in HIV transmission [J]. Nat Rev Microbiol,2004,2(1):33-42.
[3] 岳晓丽,蒋宁,龚向东. 2012年全国梅毒与淋病疫情分析报告[EB/OL]. (2014-03-01)[2014-09-30].http: //www.ncstdc.org/shav.asp?id=158.
[4] 尹跃平. 性传播疾病实验室诊断指南[M]. 上海:上海科学技术出版社,2007:7-8.
[5] Herring A, Ballard R, Mabey D, et al. Evaluation of rapid diagnostic tests: syphilis [J]. Nat Rev Microbiol,2006,4(12 Suppl): S33-S40.
[6] 杨阳,顾伟鸣,金月兰,等. 上海市梅毒螺旋体血清学实验室室间质量评价 [J].检验医学,2009,24(12):922-926.
[7] The National Institute for Biological Standards and Control[EB/OL].(2014-03-01)[2014-09-30]. http://www.nibsc.org/about_us.aspx.
[8] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. User protocol for evaluation of qualitative test performance; approved guideline-second edition[S]. EP12-A2, CLSI, 2008.
[9] 王治国. 临床检验方法确认与性能验证[M]. 北京:人民卫生出版社, 2009:340-348
[10] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Interference testing in clinical chemistry; approved guideline-second edition[S]. EP7-A2, CLSI, 2005.
[11] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Protocols for determination of limits of detection and limits of quantitation; approved guideline[S]. EP17-A2, CLSI, 2004.
[12] 王春仁,许伟. 医疗器械加速老化实验确定有效期的基本原理和方法[J]. 中国医疗器械信息,2008,14(5):67-70.
[13] Gu WM, Yang Y, Wang QZ,et al. Comparing performance of traditional non-treponemal tests on syphilis and non-syphilis serum samples[J]. Int J STD AIDS,2013,24(12):919-925.
[14] Rigsby P, Ison C, Brierley M, et al. Evaluation of two human plasma pools as candidate international standard preparations for syphilitic antibodies[J]. Biologicals, 2009, 37(4): 245-251.
[15] 侯晓菁,梁艳,陈洁,等. 化学发光法检测梅毒螺旋体特异性抗体的实验评价[J].检验医学,2010,25(5):365-367.

梅毒血清学试剂性能评估方案的优化及应用

Optimization and application of performance evaluation protocol for syphilis serologic assays

RichHTML

PDF (PC)

可视化

被引次数

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

[1]	胡韶华, 陈黎, 赵梦, 马展, 张泓. 上海地区儿童肺炎支原体感染流行病学特征分析[J]. 检验医学, 2023, 38(1): 14-17.
[2]	岳彩蝶, 李军燕, 丁爱军, 谢力, 曾韦锟. SARS-CoV-2抗原快速检测方法的研究进展[J]. 检验医学, 2023, 38(1): 87-93.
[3]	朱宇清, 王海滨, 王连明, 赵芳, 冯品宁, 张鹏, 郭书忍, 彭亦冰, 程黎明, 传良敏, 王华梁. 国产某品牌谷胱甘肽还原酶试剂盒多中心横向联合性能评价[J]. 检验医学, 2022, 37(5): 449-455.
[4]	齐结华, 张春利, 吴守乐, 宦宇, 陈宇, 乐江漫, 蔡徐山. 孕妇梅毒血清学筛查流程探讨[J]. 检验医学, 2021, 36(7): 710-713.
[5]	赵冉, 刘文彬, 林斐然, 龚敬凯, 虞啸炫, 葛丹红, 唐立萍, 欧元祝. 基于Westgard西格玛规则的血气分析室内质量控制及评价[J]. 检验医学, 2021, 36(5): 544-548.
[6]	岳朝艳, 段朝晖, 章迪, 韦婕, 罗晓红, 张倩岚, 伍勇, 应春妹. 磁微粒吖啶酯化学发光法检测AMH的性能评估及成年女性AMH参考区间的建立[J]. 检验医学, 2021, 36(1): 95-100.
[7]	侯江厚, 张灵霞, 孙雯娜, 刘艳华, 杨秉芬, 孙卫国. HPV16型L1蛋白优势表位原核表达及其血清学验证[J]. 检验医学, 2020, 35(9): 928-932.
[8]	周碧燕, 赵丽萍, 陶文富, 方灵燕, 李少芳, 张可可, 何亚妮, 韦荣国. 磁微粒化学发光法检测乙型肝炎6项血清标志物关键性能指标验证[J]. 检验医学, 2020, 35(5): 476-480.
[9]	钮静, 权文强, 李冬. LAMP技术检测非小细胞肺癌患者外周血EGFR基因L858R位点突变方法的建立及应用[J]. 检验医学, 2020, 35(3): 273-277.
[10]	童明宏, 吴晓辉, 王振华, 张庭瑛, 韦欣, 陈粹文, 李盈, 崔向明, 盛慧明, 黄强. 化学发光微粒免疫分析法检测抗TP抗体的性能评价和应用[J]. 检验医学, 2020, 35(2): 137-141.
[11]	贺勇, 王辉, 李小玲, 聂鑫, 江虹. 多台POCT血气分析仪比对方法的建立与分析[J]. 检验医学, 2019, 34(8): 758-762.
[12]	张兴旺, 何莉莉, 高霞, 王芳, 张晓梅, 魏莲花. 免疫印迹法检测梅毒螺旋体IgM抗体对胎传梅毒诊断的价值[J]. 检验医学, 2019, 34(1): 84-85.
[13]	王勤. 梅毒血清学方法检测策略探讨[J]. 检验医学, 2018, 33(8): 749-751.
[14]	庄亦晖, 龚燕, 许晓峰, 卢仁泉, 高翔, 郭林. 梅毒螺旋体特异性抗体检测方法在血清学诊断中的应用评估[J]. 检验医学, 2018, 33(7): 633-636.
[15]	唐立萍, 欧元祝, 刘文彬, 虞啸炫. 运用上海地区室间质评结果评价2种糖化血红蛋白POCT分析仪[J]. 检验医学, 2018, 33(3): 248-251.