论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨不同方法检测类风湿因子在类风湿性关节炎诊断中的临床应用价值。方法:分别采用免疫散射比浊法和胶乳凝集法对55例类风湿关节炎患者(观察组)、55例非类风湿关节炎患者(对照组1)和55例健康者(对照组2)的血清类风湿因子进行检测。结果:免疫散射比浊法检测观察组和对照组1的类风湿阳性因子分别为56.36%(31例)和23.64%(13例),对照组2无阳性结果,诊断效率为74.48%;胶乳凝集法检测三组类风湿阳性因子分别为74.55%(41例)、45.46%(25例)和21.82%(12例),诊断效率为66.12%。。结论:两组方法仅能对Ig-RF进行检测,免疫散射比浊法对类风湿因子的敏感度比胶乳凝集法低,特异性比胶乳凝集法高,但诊断率略高于胶乳凝集法。
Objective: To explore the clinical application value of different methods to detect rheumatoid factor in the diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis. Methods: Fifty-five patients with rheumatoid arthritis (observation group), 55 non-rheumatoid arthritis patients (control group 1) and 55 healthy controls (control group 2) were immunostained with latex and turbidimetric method respectively Serum rheumatoid factor test. Results: The results of immunostaining turbidimetry showed that 56.36% (31 cases) and 23.64% (13 cases) of rheumatoid positive factors in observation group and control group 1, respectively. There was no positive result in control group 2, the diagnostic efficiency was 74.48% There were 74.55% (41 cases), 45.46% (25 cases) and 21.82% (12 cases) of rheumatoid positive factors in the three groups, and the diagnostic efficiency was 66.12%. . Conclusion: The two methods can only detect Ig-RF. Immunoturbidimetric method has lower sensitivity to rheumatoid factor than latex agglutination method and higher specificity than latex agglutination method, but the diagnostic rate is slightly higher than latex agglutination method.