ArticleEuropean journal of medical research2022
Confirmation value of Western blotting in detecting anti-treponema pallidum specific antibodies with suspicious results.
Article in European journal of medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDue to the inconsistent results of anti-treponema pallidum (TP) specific antibodies by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and Treponema pallidum granule agglutination assay (TPPA) in clinical work, there will be a certain proportion of false-positives and false-negatives depending on TPPA as confirmation results. This study aimed to evaluate the necessity of Western blotting (WB) in samples with inconsistent results in detecting anti-TP antibodies by ELISA and TPPA.
methodsSpecific anti-TP test results in our clinical laboratory were retrospectively analyzed. The specimens with a positive or a negative result, but with colored ELISA plates, were retested by TPPA. WB was used to confirm the suspicious results between ELISA and TPPA. The Chi-square test was used to analyze whether the difference was statistically significant.
resultsA total of 106,757 anti-TP specimens were screened by ELISA from August 2018 to December 2019; 3972 were retested by TPPA, and 3809 were positive by TPPA. ELISA and TPPA showed different results in 163 specimens. Among them, 29 specimens were negative and 134 were positive by ELISA; 76 were negative, 23 were positive, and 64 were "reserve" by TPPA; 93 were negative, 31 were positive, and 39 were suspicious by the WB confirmation test. Compared with WB, the difference in the results of ELISA and TPPA was statistically significant.
conclusionsTPPA is an effective retest method for anti-TP antibody detection. If the results of anti-TP antibodies by ELISA and TPPA are inconsistent, it is necessary to use WB for confirmation. Trial registration This retrospective analysis is in accordance with the ethical guidelines of China and approved by the second hospital of Jiaxing (jxey-2018048).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.