Electrochemiluminescence immunoassay versus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in detection of antibodies of acquired immune deficiency syndrome

LI Yonggang; LI Ning; YI Fuling

doi:10.7619/jcmp.201923004

Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice > 2019 > 23(23): 14-16. > DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201923004

LI Yonggang, LI Ning, YI Fuling. Electrochemiluminescence immunoassay versus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in detection of antibodies of acquired immune deficiency syndrome[J]. Journal of Clinical Medicine in Practice, 2019, 23(23): 14-16. DOI: 10.7619/jcmp.201923004

Citation:

PDF (419 KB)

Electrochemiluminescence immunoassay versus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in detection of antibodies of acquired immune deficiency syndrome

Department of Laboratory, Xi′an First Hospital, Xi′an, Shaanxi, 710002

More Information

Received Date: October 11, 2019
Available Online: February 28, 2021
Published Date: December 14, 2019

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Objective To compare effect of electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) in detection of antibodies of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV).
Methods A total of 12 457 blood samples were collected from our hospital from January 2017 to June 2018 for detection of HIV. The positive blood samples detected by ECLIA and ELISA were sent to the HIV confirmation center for the further detection. The detection results of ECLIA and ELISA werecompared with those given by HIV confirmation center.
Results Totally 35 positive blood samples were detected by ELISA, and the positive rate was 0.28%. Totally 32 positive samples were detected by ECLIA, and the positive rate was 0.26%. Totally 30 positive blood samples were confirmed by the HIV confirmation center. There was no significant difference in the positive rate of HIV antibodies between ELISA and ECLIA (P>0.05). The OD/CO value of positive blood samples detected by ELISA was mostly in the range of 1.35 to 1.80 (P < 0.05), and the larger the OD/CO value was, the higher the coincidence rate with the confirmed results was. The cut-off value of positive samples detected by ECLIA was mostly in the range of 150.00 to 220.00 (P < 0.05), and the larger the cut-off value was, the higher the coincidence rate with the confirmed results was.
Conclusion Both ECLIA and ELISA have their own advantages and disadvantages, and how to choice them should be considered comprehensively in clinical application.

FullText(HTML)

References (12)

References

[1]	Maiman M, Fruchter R G, Guy L, et al. Human immunodeficiency virus infection and invasive cervical carcinoma[J]. Cancer, 1993, 71(2): 402-406. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930115)71:2<402::AID-CNCR2820710222>3.0.CO;2-Y
[2]	中华医学会感染病学分会艾滋病学组. 艾滋病诊疗指南(2011版)[J]. 中华传染病杂志, 2011, 29(10): 629-640. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1000-6680.2011.10.018
[3]	段美婷, 兰良子. 化学发光法与酶联免疫吸附法进行血HIV检测效果评价[J]. 现代仪器与医疗, 2016, 22(5): 78-80. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-XDYI201605029.htm
[4]	Marcellin F, Lorente N, Demoulin B, et al. Comparison of risk factors in HIV-infected men who have sex with men, coinfected or not with hepatitis C virus (ANRS VESPA2 French cross-sectional national survey)[J]. Sex Transm Infect, 2015, 91(1): 21-23. doi: 10.1136/sextrans-2014-051542
[5]	孟保福, 宋红林, 李翠芬. ELISA法在诊断梅毒螺旋体感染中的临床检验价值[J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2016, 26(20): 4611-4613. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZHYY201620016.htm
[6]	Champsaur H, Dussaix E, Tournier P. Hemagglutination inhibition, single radial hemolysis, and ELISA tests for the detection of IgG and IgM to rubella virus[J]. J Med Virol, 1980, 5(4): 273-286. doi: 10.1002/1096-9071(1980)5:4<273::AID-JMV1890050403>3.0.CO;2-J
[7]	金一鸣, 方志红, 陆荣. 血液筛查中1例低浓度HIV窗口期标本的检测[J]. 临床输血与检验, 2018, 20(1): 42-44. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-LSXY201801016.htm
[8]	李云春, 钟利, 王悦, 等. 类风湿性关节炎患者HIV抗体检测假阳性结果影响因素的分析[J]. 中华检验医学杂志, 2016, 39(7): 522-525. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1009-9158.2016.07.012
[9]	Sommese L, Sabia C, Esposito A, et al. Comparison of performance of two Treponema pallidum automated chemiluminescent immunoassays in blood donors[J]. Infect Dis (Lond), 2016, 48(6): 483-487. doi: 10.3109/23744235.2016.1142674
[10]	韩春俐, 贺红, 陈琳. ECLIA和ELISA检测HIV的对比研究[J]. 中国临床研究, 2017, 30(2): 254-256. https://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-ZGCK201702034.htm
[11]	Teimouri A, Modarressi M H, Shojaee S, et al. Detection of Toxoplasma-specific immunoglobulin G in human sera: performance comparison of in house Dot-ELISA with ECLIA and ELISA[J]. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis, 2018, 37(8): 1421-1429. doi: 10.1007/s10096-018-3266-y
[12]	Maurya P K, Kulshreshtha D, Singh A K, et al. Isolated superficial peroneal neuropathy: a rare presentation of Hansen's disease (leprosy)[J]. QJM, 2015, 108(5): 419-420. http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/24939189

Cited By

Get Citation

PDF

XML

Article views (395) PDF downloads (22)

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Electrochemiluminescence immunoassay versus enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in detection of antibodies of acquired immune deficiency syndrome

Abstract

References

Catalog

Export File

Citation

Format

Content