简介：　　【摘要】 目的 分析血清 C反应蛋白（ CRP）检验在病毒性心肌炎诊断中的作用。方法 40例病毒性心肌炎患者作为观察组， 另选同期接受健康体检的 40例健康者作为对照组。观察组患者于入院后第 1天、第 3天、第 7天、第 14天空腹时抽取静脉血标本， 通过免疫比浊法对血清 CRP水平进行检测。对照组于体检时通过免疫比浊法检测血清 CRP水平。分析对比观察组患者不同时间段与对照组 CRP水平 ;轻中度、重度病毒性心肌炎患者 CRP水平。结果 观察组入院第 1天 CRP水平为（ 24.66±5.34） mg/L， 入院第 3天为（ 16.87±3.24） mg/L， 入院第 7天为（ 8.45±1.23） mg/L， 入院第 14天为（ 8.72±1.20） mg/L;对照组体检时 CRP水平为（ 8.53±1.27） mg/L。观察组入院第 1天、第 3天 CRP水平处于最高水平， 均明显高于对照组， 差异具有统计学意义（ t=18.5856、 15.1571， P=0.0000、 0.0000<0.05） ;经治疗后观察组 CRP水平逐渐下降， 入院第 7天、第 14天 CRP水平恢复正常水平， 与对照组对比， 差异无统计学意义（ t=0.2862、 06877， P=0.7755、 0.4937>0.05）。重度病毒性心肌炎患者 CRP水平（ 24.62±4.20） mg/L高于轻中度病毒性心肌炎患者的（ 19.24±3.62） mg/L， 差异具有统计学意义（ t=4.3507， P=0.0000<0.05）。结论 在病毒性心肌炎诊断中 CRP可作为早期诊断参照指标， 为临床医生提供更多诊断依据， 判断患者病毒性心肌炎程度， 提高诊断准确率， 尽早使患者得到治疗， 避免患者病情延误。  　　【关键词】 血清 C反应蛋白检验 ;病毒性心肌炎 ;免疫比浊法 ;诊断价值  　 [Abstract] Objective To analyze the role of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) in the diagnosis of viral myocarditis. Methods 40 patients with viral myocarditis were selected as the observation group, and 40 healthy people who received physical examination at the same time were selected as the control group. In the observation group, venous blood samples were taken on the first day, third day, seventh day and fourteenth day after admission. In the control group, the serum CRP level was detected by immunoturbidimetric method. The CRP levels of patients in the observation group at different time periods and the control group, and the CRP levels of patients with mild to moderate and severe viral myocarditis were analyzed and compared. Results the CRP level of the observation group on the first day of admission was (24.66 ± 5.34) mg / L, the third day was (16.87 ± 3.24) mg / L, the seventh day was (8.45 ± 1.23) mg / L, the 14th day was (8.72 ± 1.20) mg / L; in the control group, the CRP level was (8.53 ± 1.27) mg / L. The CRP level of the observation group was at the highest level on the first and third day of admission, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (t = 18.5856, 15.1571, P = 0.0000, 0.0000 < 0.05); After treatment, the CRP level of the observation group gradually decreased, and it returned to normal level on the 7th and 14th day after admission, and the difference was not statistically significant (t = 0.2862, 06877, P = 0.7755, 0.4937 > 0.05). The level of CRP in patients with severe viral myocarditis (24.62 ± 4.20) mg / l was higher than that in patients with mild to moderate viral myocarditis (19.24 ± 3.62) mg / L, and the difference was statistically significant (t = 4.3507, P = 0.0000 < 0.05). Conclusion in the diagnosis of viral myocarditis, CRP can be used as a reference index for early diagnosis, provide more diagnostic basis for clinicians, judge the degree of viral myocarditis, improve the diagnostic accuracy, make patients get treatment as soon as possible, and avoid the delay of patients' condition.

简介：[摘要 ] 目的 比较化学发光免疫分析技术（ CLIA）和酶联免疫吸附试验（ ELISA）在乙肝病毒血清学检验中的应用价值。 方法 选取 2017年 1月～ 2019年 6月间我院收治的 80例疑似乙型肝炎患者，采用 CLIA法、 ELISA法对乙肝病毒血清学指标进行检测，以实时荧光定量 PCR检验结果作为参照，分析 CLIA法、 ELISA法對乙肝的诊断结果。 结果 ELISA法对乙肝的诊断灵敏度、特异度、准确性分别为 91.84%、 93.55%、 92.50%， CLIA法分别为 93.88%、 96.77%、 95.00%，二者比较均无统计学差异（ P均 >0.05）。 CLIA法、 ELISA法对乙肝的诊断结果与实时荧光定量 PCR之间具有良好一致性， Kappa均 >0.7。 CLIA法对 HBsAg、 HBeAg、 HBeAb的阳性检出率高于 ELISA法（ P<0.05），而在 HBsAb、 HBcAb阳性检出率比较无统计学差异（ P>0.05）。 结论 CLIA法、 ELISA法对乙型肝炎的诊断效果均较好，而在乙肝病毒血清学标志物检验中， CLIA法的检验准确性高于 ELISA法。  　　 [关键词 ] 乙型肝炎；乙肝病毒；血清学检验；化学发光免疫分析法；酶联免疫吸附试验  　　 [Abstract] Objective To compare the application value of chemiluminescence immunoassay（ CLIA） and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay（ ELISA） in serological testing of hepatitis B virus. Methods From January 2017 to June 2019， 80 patients with suspected hepatitis B who were admitted to our hospital were selected. CLIA method and ELISA method were used to determine the serological indices of hepatitis B virus. Real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR test results were used as the reference. The diagnosis results of hepatitis B by CLIA method and ELISA method were analyzed. Results The diagnostic sensitivity， specificity and accuracy of ELISA for hepatitis B were 91.84%， 93.55% and 92.50% respectively， and those of CLIA were 93.88%， 96.77%， 95.00% respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the two methods（ P>0.05 for all） . CLIA method and ELISA method for the diagnostic results of hepatitis B were well consistent with real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR（ Kappa>0.7 for all） . The positive detection rate of HBsAg， HBeAg and HBeAb by CLIA was higher than that of ELISA（ P<0.05）， and the difference of positive detection rate of HBsAb and HBcAb was not statistically significant（ P>0.05） . Conclusion CLIA method and ELISA method are favorable for the diagnosis of hepatitis B. In the hepatitis B virus serological marker test， the test accuracy of CLIA is higher than that of ELISA.  　　 [Key words] Hepatitis B； Hepatitis B virus； Serological testing； Chemiluminescence immunoassay（ CLIA）； Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay（ ELISA）