Objectives:To study the diagnosis effect of TP-ELISA,TP-PA,RPR and TRUST for advanced syphilis.Methods:A total of 150 advanced syphilis patients and 150 healthy people were included in this study.TP-ELISA,TP-PA,RPR,TRUST test were used for advanced syphilis diagnosis and treatment evaluation.The sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value and negative predictive value between the four groups were compared.Results:The TP-PA test had the highest positive rate in advanced syphilis group (99.3 ％) and RPR test had the lowest positive rate in healthy control group (0.0％),with statistically significant difference between the four groups (x2 =38.646,x2 =8.542,P ＜ 0.05).There was significant difference in sensitivity,specificity,positive predictive value and negative predictive value between the four groups (x2 =38.646,x2 =8.542,x2 =9.737,x2 =32.986,P ＜ 0.05).The treatment effects evaluation between the four groups had significant difference (x2 =98.124,x2 =11.715,P ＜0.01).Conclusion:TP-ELISA and TP-PA has a higher sensitivity and specificity which can be used in the diagnosis of advanced syphilis.RPR and TRUST test can better evaluate the treatment effects.%目的:考察TP-ELISA、TP-PA、RPR、TRUST四种方法对进展期梅毒诊疗效果差异.方法:采集150例进展期梅毒阳性患者和150例健康对照的血样并使用TP-ELISA、TP-PA、RPR、TRUST四种方法进行检测,测定其灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值.结果:四种检测方法中TP-PA法梅毒患者组阳性率最高(99.3％),RPR法健康对照组阳性率最低(0.0％),四组间比较差异具有统计学意义(x2=38.646,x2=8.542,P＜0.05).TP-ELISA、TP-PA、RPR、TRUST四种方法的灵敏度、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值差异均具有统计学意义(x2=38.646,x2=8.542,x2=9.737,x2=32.986,P＜0.05).四种检测方法对治疗有效和治愈患者的梅毒检出效果差异存在统计学意义(x2=38.646,x2=98.124,x2=11.715,P＜0.01).结论:TP-LISA和TP-PA灵敏度和准确度高,可用于进展期梅毒的诊断,RPR法和TRUST法对疗效判断准确,四种方法具不同临床应用价值.
展开▼
