不同梅毒血清学检测方法应用于婚、孕前梅毒筛查中的有效性探讨

仇丽

中国医药指南 ›› 2025, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (12) : 108-111.

PDF(581 KB)
PDF(581 KB)
中国医药指南 ›› 2025, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (12) : 108-111. DOI: 10.15912/j.issn.1671-8194.2025.12.030
应用研究

不同梅毒血清学检测方法应用于婚、孕前梅毒筛查中的有效性探讨

  • 仇丽
作者信息 +

Exploring the Effectiveness of Different Syphilis Serological Detection Methods in the Diagnosis of Syphilis

  • QIU Li
Author information +

摘要

目的 探讨在婚、孕前检查梅毒筛查中适用的梅毒血清学检测策略。方法 选择于2022年6月至2024年5月在本区妇幼保健所婚孕检中心做婚前医学检查+孕前优生健康检查的3 852人为研究对象,采集受检者血清标本,分别采用梅毒螺旋体抗体胶体金试纸(胶体金法)、化学发光免疫分析法(CLIA)、快速血浆反应素环状卡片试验(RPR)进行梅毒血清学筛查,检出的阳性标本再采用梅毒螺旋体明胶颗粒凝集试验(TPPA )进行复查确证。本试验中将TPPA检测结果视为金标准。分析各个方法阳性检出率、检测性能等情况。结果 3 852份血清标本梅毒抗体初筛检测,胶体金法阳性37例(阳性检出率0.96%),RPR阳性25例(阳性检出率0.65%),CLIA法阳性41例(阳性检出率1.06%),梅毒抗体初筛阳性标本合计42例(阳性检出率1.09%),最后经TPPA确证梅毒抗体阳性39例(阳性检出率1.01%)。胶体金法、CLIA法、胶体金法+CLIA+RPR 的阳性检出率无统计学意义(P>0.05),且均高于RPR的阳性检出率,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。以TPPA检测结果为金标准,胶体金法、CLIA法、胶体金法+CLIA +RPR的灵敏度和准确率无统计学意义(P>0.05),且均高于RPR,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。几种方法的特异度无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 在婚、孕前检查梅毒筛查中先用胶体金法检测出快检报告,再用CLIA法检测,阳性做RPR检测,3种方法联合使用可保证梅毒筛查的快速、灵敏、准确、有效,最大限度减少漏诊和误诊的可能性,对于及早发现梅毒感染,及时提供干预措施。

Abstract

Objective To explore the value of using different syphilis serological tests in the diagnosis of syphilis. Methods From June 2022 to May 2024, a study was conducted on 3 852 individuals who underwent both premarital medical examinations and pre pregnancy eugenics health examinations at the Maternal and Child Health Center in our district. Blood samples were collected from the subjects and subjected to colloidal gold method (TP), rapid plasma reactive ring card test (RPR), and chemiluminescence method (CLIA). The detection rate, diagnostic efficacy, and staging detection of each protocol were analyzed based on the comprehensive evaluation results as the gold standard. Results The 3 852 serum samples were preliminarily screened for syphilis antibodies, with 37 positive cases detected by colloidal gold method (positive detection rate 0.96%), 25 positive cases detected by RPR method (positive detection rate 0.65%), and 41 positive cases detected by CLIA method (positive detection rate 1.06%). A total of 42 samples were preliminarily screened for syphilis antibodies (positive detection rate 1.09%), and finally confirmed by TPPA as positive for syphilis antibodies in 39 cases (positive detection rate 1.01%). There was no significant difference in the positive detection rates of colloidal gold method, CLIA method, and colloidal gold method+CLAI+RPR (P>0.05), and all were higher than the positive detection rate of RPR, with statistical significance (P<0.05). Using TPPA detection results as the gold standard, there was no significant difference in sensitivity and accuracy among colloidal gold method, CLIA method, colloidal gold method+CLAI+PRR (P>0.05), and all were higher than RPR, with statistical significance (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in specificity among several methods (P>0.05). Conclusions In marriage, pregnancy check syphilis screening with colloidal gold detection quick test report, then use CLIA method detection, positive RPR detection, combined use of three methods can guarantee rapid, sensitive, accurate and effective, syphilis screening minimize the possibility of missed diagnosis and misdiagnosis, for early detection of syphilis infection, provide timely intervention

关键词

梅毒 / 血清学检测 / 胶体金法 / 化学发光免疫分析法 / 快速血浆反应素环状卡片试验 / 梅毒螺旋体明胶颗粒凝集试验。

Key words

Syphilis / Serological testing / Diagnosis / Colloidal gold method / Rapid plasma reactive factor circular card test / Treponema pallidum gelatin particle agglutination test.

引用本文

导出引用
仇丽. 不同梅毒血清学检测方法应用于婚、孕前梅毒筛查中的有效性探讨[J]. 中国医药指南. 2025, 23(12): 108-111 https://doi.org/10.15912/j.issn.1671-8194.2025.12.030
QIU Li. Exploring the Effectiveness of Different Syphilis Serological Detection Methods in the Diagnosis of Syphilis[J]. Guide of China Medicine. 2025, 23(12): 108-111 https://doi.org/10.15912/j.issn.1671-8194.2025.12.030
中图分类号: R759.1   

参考文献

[1] 陆荣,王仪含,陈颖. TPPA、TRUST、TP-ELISA方法在梅毒血清学检测中的临床价值[J]. 医学理论与实践,2024,37(2):299-300,303.
[2] 刘晶晶,李艳娜,牛亚楠. 2019—2022 年豫东地区门诊住院患者梅毒检测分析[J]. 河南医学高等专科学校学报,2023,35(5):556-558
[3] 徐东江,王克迪,吴俊. 三种梅毒血清学检测策略在临床梅毒诊断中的应用研究[J]. 中国艾滋病性病,2019,25(9):936-939
[4] 金祥宁,张弋. 三种梅毒螺旋体抗体检测方法在新生儿梅毒诊断中的应用[J]. 河北北方学院学报(自然科学版),2023,39(4):47-49.
[5] 张微,郭楠,李宝萍,等. 化学发光微粒子免疫检测梅毒抗体假阳性分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志,2021,31(10):1180-1182
[6] 张赞,陈娜云,孙阳,等. 梅毒螺旋体明胶凝集试验对酶联免疫吸附试验法和金标法梅毒抗体检测的结果评价[J]. 国际检验医学杂志,2016,37(3):291-293
[7] 李兰,刘慧. 梅毒血清学检测策略和验证方法在临床梅毒诊断中的应用评价[J]. 基层医学论坛,2024,28(16):64-66
[8] 刘经纬,徐文绮,尹跃平. 梅毒实验室检测技术及策略的进展[J]. 中国艾滋病性病,2021,27(3):323-326.
[9] 时小淋,吴美慧. 全自动化学发光微粒子免疫分析法在梅毒螺旋体特异性抗体检测中的应用[J]. 实用检验医师杂志,2024,16(1):51-53.
[10] 陆荣,王仪含,陈颖. TPPA、TRUST、TP-ELISA方法在梅毒血清学检测中的临床价值[J]. 医学理论与实践,2024,37(2):299-300,303.
[11] 刘春华,任高翔,耿杰,等. 五种梅毒血清学试验方法在梅毒临床分期中的应用分析[J]. 河南预防医学杂志,2020,31(9):662-664
[12] 卢改会,普雄明. 血清RPR滴度与神经梅毒相关性分析[J]. 中国麻风皮肤病杂志,2017,33(10):577-579,591.

PDF(581 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

段落导航
相关文章

/