ABSTRACT
Objective To evaluate the accuracy and feasibility of time-resolved immunofluorometric assay (TRI FA) for detection of HBsAg based on Abbott automated chemiluminescence immunoassay(CMIA),so as to carry out this project in primary hospitals,and provide reference for individual antiviral strategy and prediction of therapeutic effect.Methods Serum of 157 patients infected with hepatitis B virus were detected with CMIA and TRIFA,specimens with HBsAg titers exceeding the detection limit were firstly diluted,then performed quantitative analysis.HBsAg levels were divided into 4 groups:≤100 IU/mL,101-1 000 IU/mL,1 001-20 000 IU/mL,and ＞ 20 000 IU/mL,quantitative correlation between two methods was analyzed.Results The linear regression equation of two methods was Y=2.323X-896.3,correlation coefficent r=0.943,P＜0.001.CMIA was as a reference,4 groups were divided for analysis,results showed that when detected specimens was at low concentration of HBsAg,TRIFA value was low compared with CMIA method,while detected specimens was at high concentration of HB sAg,CMIA value was high,two reagents had good consistency in the detection of different concentrations of HBsAg(both P＜0.05),when concentration was at 1 001-20 000 IU/mL,consistency was the best.Conclusion The accuracy of two reagents in the quantitative detection of HBsAg is similar,and the best correlation of detection value is 1 000-20 000 IU/mL.TRIFA assay has wide application for its low-cost and easy to be operated,which is especially suitable for primary hospitals.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE@#To determine whether time-resolved immunofluorescence assay (TRIFA) shares the similar accuracy and specificity with automatic chemiluminescence immunoassay (CMIA) in analyzing HBeAg levels in hepatitis B. @*METHODS@#A total of 157 serum samples were collected from outpatients with infection of HBV in Xiangya Hospital, Central South University. CMIA and TRIFA were used to analyze HBeAg quantitation and HBeAg/HBeAb qualitative detection, respectively. @*RESULTS@#The linear regression equation for the two methods was Y=0.72779X-4.0551 (r=0.712, P<0.001). Compared with the CMIA, the sensitivity and specificity in detection of HBeAg by TRIFA were 89.89% and 100%, respectively, and the coincidence rate of HBeAg was 94.27% by two assays. Similarly, the sensitivity and specificity in detection of HBeAb by TRIFA were 100% and 95.45%, respectively. The coincidence rate was 97.45% by two assays. @*CONCLUSION@#TRIFA has similar accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity with CMIA in quantitative detection of HBeAg, and their coincidence rate in detection of HBeAg/HBeAb is high.