| 布鲁氏菌病不同初筛方法及诊断试剂检测差异性分析 |
| |
| 引用本文： | 刘丽娅,叶锋,马晓菁,谷文喜,谢彩云,钟旗,易新萍.布鲁氏菌病不同初筛方法及诊断试剂检测差异性分析[J].新疆农业科学,2022,59(1):215-222. |
| |
| 作者姓名： | 刘丽娅 叶锋 马晓菁 谷文喜 谢彩云 钟旗 易新萍 |
| |
| 作者单位： | 新疆畜牧科学院兽医研究所/新疆畜牧科学院动物临床医学研究中心,乌鲁木齐 830000 |
| |
| 基金项目： | 新疆维吾尔自治区自然科学基金(2020D01A44) |
| |
| 摘 要： | 【目的】应用布鲁氏菌病4种初筛方法及11种商品化诊断试剂检测新疆地区采集的207份牛、羊血清学样品,分析结果差异,对方法及产品进行评价。【方法】以英国参考实验室APHA竞争性ELISA试剂盒检测结果为标准,确定布鲁氏菌病牛阳性血清78份、阴性57份,羊阳性血清52份、阴性20份。应用RBT抗原(Ⅰ)、(Ⅱ),FPA抗原(Ⅲ)、GICA(A、B、C、D)、iELISA抗体检测试剂盒(a、b、c、d)对上述样品进行检测。【结果】11种商品化诊断试剂检测结果敏感性介于42%~100%,特异性介于32%~100%,阴阳性符合一致率介于67%~98%,与英国参考实验室cELISA检测方法间的Kappa值介于0.35~1。【结论】采用不同方法、不同试剂检测结果间存有差异;应用同一方法,采用不同试剂结果存有差异;应用同厂家试剂,检测牛、羊血清,敏感及特异性结果也有不同。iELISA具有较好的敏感性,RBT有较好的特异性。RBT方法一致率最高,其次为FPA、GICA、iELISA。RBT、FPA与其完全或高度符合,GICA和iELISA为中度符合。RBT方法Ⅱ抗原优于Ⅰ抗原;GICA 4种试纸条差异较为显著,A最佳,B最差;iELISA试剂盒a、c优于b、d。
|
| 关 键 词： | 布鲁氏菌病 初筛方法 诊断试剂 差异性 |
| 收稿时间： | 2020-09-30 |
Analysis of the Difference in Detecting Brucellosis with Different Initial Screening Methods and Different Diagnostic Reagents |
| |
| LIU Liya,YE Feng,MA Xiaojing,GU Wenxi,XIE Caiyun,ZHONG Qi,YI Xinping.Analysis of the Difference in Detecting Brucellosis with Different Initial Screening Methods and Different Diagnostic Reagents[J].Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences,2022,59(1):215-222. |
| |
| Authors: | LIU Liya YE Feng MA Xiaojing GU Wenxi XIE Caiyun ZHONG Qi YI Xinping |
| |
| Institution: | The Veterinary Research Institute, Animal Science Academy of Xinjiang/Animal Clinical Medicine Research Center,Animal Science Academy of Xinjiang, Urumqi 830000,China |
| |
| Abstract: | 【Objective】 Four primary screening methods and 11 commercial diagnostic reagents for brucellosis were used to detect 207 cattle and sheep serological samples collected in Xinjiang. Analyze the differences in the results and make a preliminary evaluation of the methods and products. 【Method】 Based on the test results of the APHA competitive ELISA kit in the British reference laboratory,The results were 78 positive sera from cattle with brucellosis and 57 negative sera, 52 positive sera from sheep and 20 negative sera. Use RBT antigen (Ⅰ), (Ⅱ), FPA antigen (Ⅲ), GICA (A, B, C, D), iELISA antibody detection kit (a, b, c, d) to detect the above samples. 【Results】 The sensitivity of the test results is between 42%-100%, the specificity is between 32%-100%, the coincidence rate between negative and positive is between 67%-98%, and the Kappa value between the cELISA test method of the British reference laboratory is between 0.35-1. 【Conclusion】 There are differences in the detection results of different methods and different reagents; there are differences in the results of using the same method and different reagents; the detection of bovine and sheep serum using the same manufacturer's reagents has different sensitivity and specificity results. Comparing the test results of different primary screening methods, it is found that iELISA has better sensitivity and RBT has better specificity. From the results of detection agreement, the agreement rate of RBT method is the highest, followed by FPA, GICA, and iELISA. The Kappa value between the cELISA test method of the British reference laboratory shows that RBT and FPA are completely or highly consistent with them, and GICA and iELISA are moderately consistent. Comparing the test results of different reagents of the same method, it is found that the RBT method II antigen is better than the I antigen; the four GICA test strips have significant differences, A is the best and B is the worst; iELISA kit a and c are better than other b and d. |
| |
| Keywords: | Brucellosis preliminary screening method diagnostic reagent difference |
|
| 点击此处可从《新疆农业科学》浏览原始摘要信息 |
| 点击此处可从《新疆农业科学》下载免费的PDF全文 |
|
