论文部分内容阅读
目的了解广州地区用于献血者筛查的2种抗-HCVEIA检测试剂(上海科华和美国Abbott)的特异性。方法对随机抽取的141份经EIA检测抗-HCV阳性的标本采用RIBA和Q-PCR进行确证,并比较2种抗-HCVEIA试剂检测阳性结果的确证阳性率。结果 69份双试剂(2种EIA试剂)检测均阳性的标本中,RIBA和Q-PCR均阳性的39份;RIBA阳性、而Q-PCR阴性的5份;RIBA不确定、Q-PCR阴性的6份;RIBA和Q-PCR均阴性的19份。72份单试剂(仅其中1种EIA试剂)抗-HCV阳性(上海科华8份,美国Abbott64份)标本中Q-PCR结果均阴性;RIBA检测结果除5份不确定外,其余阴性。上海科华和美国Abbott试剂检测阳性结果的确证阳性率分别为57.14%和33.08%,经统计学分析,其差异有显著性。结论上海科华试剂检测阳性结果的确证阳性率高于美国Abbott试剂。
Objective To understand the specificity of two anti-HCVVEIA reagents (Shanghai Kehua and American Abbott) used for screening blood donors in Guangzhou. Methods A total of 141 randomly selected anti-HCV positive EIA specimens were confirmed by RIBA and Q-PCR. The positive rates of the two positive anti-HCVVE reagents were compared. RESULTS: Of 69 positive samples with two reagents (two EIA reagents), 39 were positive for both RIBA and Q-PCR, 5 were positive for RIBA and 5 were negative for Q-PCR, and were uncertain for RIBA and negative for Q-PCR 6 copies; 19 were negative for both RIBA and Q-PCR. The positive results of Q-PCR in 72 single-agent (only 1 EIA) anti-HCV positive samples (8 in Shanghai Kehua and 64 in Abbott in the United States) were negative. The results of RIBA were negative except for 5 samples. Shanghai Kehua and the United States Abbott reagent positive test results were confirmed positive rates were 57.14% and 33.08%, respectively, by statistical analysis, the difference was significant. Conclusion The positive rate of positive results of Shanghai Kehua Reagent Test was higher than that of the American Abbott Reagent.