Comparison of two different methods to detect HIV antibodies / 中华实验和临床病毒学杂志
Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Virology
;
(6): 492-493, 2012.
Artículo
en Chino
| WPRIM
| ID: wpr-304999
ABSTRACT
<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>Evaluated the chemiluminescence and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to detect HIV antibodies, and compared the results, to provide a reference for the selection and clinical application of HIV screening.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>3000 cases of our hospital patients were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and chemiluminescence immunoassay, using comfirmming experimental results as gold standards. Comparing sensitivity, specificity and other Indicators.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>In the diagnosis of HIV infection, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and chemiluminescence immunoassay had no significant difference. The positive rate of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was 0.93%, while the sensitivity and specificity were 89.66%, 99.93%, the positive rate of chemiluminescence immunoassay was 1.03%, while the sensitivity and specificity were 100%, 99.93%, respectively.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Both methods are suitable for screening of HIV, having high specificity, and chemiluminescence has greater sensitivity than ELISA.</p>
Texto completo:
Disponible
Índice:
WPRIM (Pacífico Occidental)
Asunto principal:
Sangre
/
Ensayo de Inmunoadsorción Enzimática
/
Anticuerpos Anti-VIH
/
Infecciones por VIH
/
Sensibilidad y Especificidad
/
Diagnóstico
/
Alergia e Inmunología
/
Mediciones Luminiscentes
/
Métodos
Tipo de estudio:
Estudio diagnóstico
/
Guía de Práctica Clínica
Límite:
Adolescente
/
Adulto
/
Anciano
/
Femenino
/
Humanos
/
Masculino
Idioma:
Chino
Revista:
Chinese Journal of Experimental and Clinical Virology
Año:
2012
Tipo del documento:
Artículo
Similares
MEDLINE
...
LILACS
LIS