毕业论文--间接免疫荧光法和酶联免疫吸附试验检测抗核抗体的比较.docVIP

间接免疫荧光法和酶联免疫吸附试验检测抗核抗体的比较 PAGE 6 PAGE 6 PAGE PAGE 5 间接免疫荧光法和酶联免疫吸附试验 检测抗核抗体的比较 摘要： 目的：应用间接免疫荧光法（Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay，IFA）和酶联免疫吸附试验（Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay,ELISA ）对临床上怀疑自身免疫疾病的患者血清中的抗核抗体进行检测并比较。方法 ：IFA参考厂家给的说明书，用荧光显微镜可以看到不同的核型，若荧光模型比较特异为阳性，血清稀释度不同，则抗体的滴度不同；ELISA参照试剂厂家的说明书，若测试结果S/CO40AU/ml，则为阳性。结果:在收集的256例疑似自身免疫疾病的患者中，有78例IFA检测结果为阳性，178例阴性，IFA检测阳性率为30.47％;115例ELISA检测结果为阳性，141例阴性，ELISA检测阳性率为44.92％，用?2检验可知，P0.05,检测结果不同的样本有53例。结论：IFA和ELISA检测ANA的结果具有统计学意义，ELISA比IFA敏感度高。 关键词： 抗核抗体；间接荧光免疫；酶联免疫吸附试验 Comparison of indirect immunofluorescence and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to detect anti-nuclear antibodies Abstract：Objective To compare antinuclear antibody tests for detecting serum clinically suspected autoimmune diseases with IFA and ELISA. Methend IFA was followed the oprating instructions and observed fluorescent models under the fluorescence microscope. The positive result is appearing ?specific fluorescent?, then according to the dilution of serum samples determines antinuclear antibody titer; Methend ELISA was also followed the oprating instructions，the positive result is a sample value over 40 AU/ ml. Results 256 samples sera were collected from the suspected patients with autoimmune disease. Among these samples,there were 78 IFA positive and 178 IFA negative samples; the positive rate was 30.47％. There were 115 ELISA positive and 141 ELISA negative samples; the positive rate was 44.92％.53 samples have differences(P0.05). Conclusion There is significant difference between IFA and ELISA in testing the ANA; the sensitivity of ELISA is higher than IFA. Key words：Antinuclear Antibody; Indirect Immunofluorescence Assay; Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay  抗核抗体（antinuclear antibody,ANA）现代是指抗细胞内所有抗原成分的自身抗体的总称[1]。ANA主要是IgG，没有种属特异性、没有器官特异性[2]，在对自身免疫疾病的进一步诊断中有重要意义，对于一些风湿病的诊断很有价值。 ANA在自身免疫性疾病（autoimmune disease,AID）中表现的阳性程度不同，例如在未治疗的系统性红斑狼疮(SLE)、混合性结缔组织病（MCTD）患者中，阳性率可达95％，而且滴度会比较高，正常老年人可能会存在低滴度的ANA，所以不一定ANA阳性患者就被诊断为有自身免疫性疾病。因此在诊断和鉴别