加拿大诊断牛布鲁氏菌病的标准血清学试验的比较。

B W Stemshorn, L B Forbes, M D Eaglesome, K H Nielsen, F J Robertson, B S Samagh
{"title":"加拿大诊断牛布鲁氏菌病的标准血清学试验的比较。","authors":"B W Stemshorn,&nbsp;L B Forbes,&nbsp;M D Eaglesome,&nbsp;K H Nielsen,&nbsp;F J Robertson,&nbsp;B S Samagh","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Six agglutination and two complement fixation tests were compared with respect to specificity, sensitivity and relative sensitivity for the serodiagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Based on 1051 sera from brucellosis free herds, the specificity of the tests was 98.9% for the buffered plate antigen test (BPAT), 99.2% and 99.3% for the standard tube and plate agglutination tests (STAT and SPAT), respectively, and 99.8% for the 2-mercaptoethanol test (2MET). On this small sample, the rose bengal plate test (RBPT), card test (CARD) and the complement fixation test (CFT) correctly classed all sera as negative. On a sample of 167 culture positive cattle, the sensitivities of the tests were CFT: 79.0%, BPAT: 75.4, RBPT: 74.9%, CARD: 74.3%, SPAT: 73.1%, STAT: 68.9%, and 2MET: 59.9%. All tests combined detected only 82% of these infected cattle. Analysis of the relative sensitivity of the six agglutination tests gave the following ranking: BPAT greater than RBPT greater than CARD greater than SPAT greater than STAT. The 2MET ranked between the BPAT and RBPT or between the RBPT and CARD depending on the analysis used. The use of the BPAT as a screening test is recommended provided that a test of high specificity and sensitivity such as the CFT is used to confirm screening test reactions.</p>","PeriodicalId":9546,"journal":{"name":"Canadian journal of comparative medicine : Revue canadienne de medecine comparee","volume":"49 4","pages":"391-4"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1985-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1236197/pdf/compmed00004-0043.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of standard serological tests for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in Canada.\",\"authors\":\"B W Stemshorn,&nbsp;L B Forbes,&nbsp;M D Eaglesome,&nbsp;K H Nielsen,&nbsp;F J Robertson,&nbsp;B S Samagh\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Six agglutination and two complement fixation tests were compared with respect to specificity, sensitivity and relative sensitivity for the serodiagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Based on 1051 sera from brucellosis free herds, the specificity of the tests was 98.9% for the buffered plate antigen test (BPAT), 99.2% and 99.3% for the standard tube and plate agglutination tests (STAT and SPAT), respectively, and 99.8% for the 2-mercaptoethanol test (2MET). On this small sample, the rose bengal plate test (RBPT), card test (CARD) and the complement fixation test (CFT) correctly classed all sera as negative. On a sample of 167 culture positive cattle, the sensitivities of the tests were CFT: 79.0%, BPAT: 75.4, RBPT: 74.9%, CARD: 74.3%, SPAT: 73.1%, STAT: 68.9%, and 2MET: 59.9%. All tests combined detected only 82% of these infected cattle. Analysis of the relative sensitivity of the six agglutination tests gave the following ranking: BPAT greater than RBPT greater than CARD greater than SPAT greater than STAT. The 2MET ranked between the BPAT and RBPT or between the RBPT and CARD depending on the analysis used. The use of the BPAT as a screening test is recommended provided that a test of high specificity and sensitivity such as the CFT is used to confirm screening test reactions.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian journal of comparative medicine : Revue canadienne de medecine comparee\",\"volume\":\"49 4\",\"pages\":\"391-4\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1985-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1236197/pdf/compmed00004-0043.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian journal of comparative medicine : Revue canadienne de medecine comparee\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian journal of comparative medicine : Revue canadienne de medecine comparee","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

比较6种凝集试验和2种补体固定试验对牛布鲁氏菌病血清诊断的特异性、敏感性和相对敏感性。基于1051份布氏菌病无病牛群血清,缓冲板抗原试验(BPAT)特异性为98.9%,标准管凝集试验(STAT)和平板凝集试验(SPAT)特异性为99.2%和99.3%,2-硫醇试验(2MET)特异性为99.8%。在这个小样本中,玫瑰板试验(RBPT),卡试验(card)和补体固定试验(CFT)正确地将所有血清分类为阴性。在167头培养阳性牛的样本中,测试的敏感性为CFT: 79.0%, BPAT: 75.4, RBPT: 74.9%, CARD: 74.3%, SPAT: 73.1%, STAT: 68.9%, 2MET: 59.9%。所有检测加起来只检测到82%的感染牛。对六种凝集试验的相对敏感性分析得出以下排名:BPAT大于RBPT大于CARD大于SPAT大于STAT。2MET的排名介于BPAT和RBPT之间或介于RBPT和CARD之间,具体取决于所使用的分析。建议使用BPAT作为筛选试验,前提是使用高特异性和敏感性的试验,如CFT来确认筛选试验反应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A comparison of standard serological tests for the diagnosis of bovine brucellosis in Canada.

Six agglutination and two complement fixation tests were compared with respect to specificity, sensitivity and relative sensitivity for the serodiagnosis of bovine brucellosis. Based on 1051 sera from brucellosis free herds, the specificity of the tests was 98.9% for the buffered plate antigen test (BPAT), 99.2% and 99.3% for the standard tube and plate agglutination tests (STAT and SPAT), respectively, and 99.8% for the 2-mercaptoethanol test (2MET). On this small sample, the rose bengal plate test (RBPT), card test (CARD) and the complement fixation test (CFT) correctly classed all sera as negative. On a sample of 167 culture positive cattle, the sensitivities of the tests were CFT: 79.0%, BPAT: 75.4, RBPT: 74.9%, CARD: 74.3%, SPAT: 73.1%, STAT: 68.9%, and 2MET: 59.9%. All tests combined detected only 82% of these infected cattle. Analysis of the relative sensitivity of the six agglutination tests gave the following ranking: BPAT greater than RBPT greater than CARD greater than SPAT greater than STAT. The 2MET ranked between the BPAT and RBPT or between the RBPT and CARD depending on the analysis used. The use of the BPAT as a screening test is recommended provided that a test of high specificity and sensitivity such as the CFT is used to confirm screening test reactions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信