|
|
|
| Quantitative detection results analysis of TORCH using chemiluminescence in women of childbearing age in Shishi area |
| CAI Dong-hua1 HE Wei-dong2▲ LIU Ming-chun3 CHEN Qiu-yue2 QIU Xiao-wei2 YANG Bao-xu2 |
1.Department of Dermatology,Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Shishi City,Fujian Province,Shishi 352700,China;
2.Department of Clinical Laboratory,Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Shishi City,Fujian Province,Shishi 352700,China;
3.Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics,Maternal and Child Health Hospital of Shishi City,Fujian Province,Shishi 352700,China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To analyze the TORCH quantitative detection results for women of childbearing age at pre pregnancy and early pregnancy period,and to understand the TORCH infection of them to provide a basis for treatment health care measures at pre pregnancy and early pregnancy period in the region.Methods A total of 1120 women of childbearing age given TORCH screening at pre pregnancy and early pregnancy period in our hospital from January 2015 to December 2017 were selected as study objects.Among them,there were 503 cases at pre pregnancy period,617 cases at early pregnancy period,chemiluminescence immunoassay(CLIA)was used to detect quantificationally the IgM and IgG antibodies of Toxoplasma(TOX),Rubella virus(RV),Cytomegalovirus(CMV),and Herpes simplex virusⅠ+Ⅱ (HSV-Ⅰ+Ⅱ),and the test of the results were analyzed.Results The positive rate of IgM for TOX,RV,CMV and HSV-Ⅰ+Ⅱ IgM was 0.18%,0.80%,0.89%and 19.64%respectively,while the positive rates of IgG was 1.88%,79.91%,85.98%and 73.93%respectively.The positive rate of IgM,IgG for TOX and IgM,IgG for HSV-Ⅰ+Ⅱ between pre pregnancy and early pregnancy period group were not significantly different(P>0.05).The positive rates of RV-IgM,IgG in the pre pregnancy group were higher than those in the early pregnancy period group,and the positive rates of CMV-IgM,IgG were lower than those in the early pregnancy period group,and the differences were statistically significant(P<0.05).ConclusionCLIA used to quantificationally detect and screen TORCH for women of childbearing age at pre pregnancy and early pregnancy period can understand the status of the TORCH infection in time and the infection is definitely diagnosed,and the individualized recommendations and treatment methods are proposed to avoid adverse pregnancy outcomes,reduce the incidence of congenital malformations in children,and improve the quality of birth population in the region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [1] |
全军计划生育优生优育专业委员会.妊娠期TORCH筛查指南[J].解放军医药杂志，2014，26（1）：102-116.
|
| [2] |
章锦曼，阮强，张宁，等.TORCH感染筛查诊断与干预原则和工作流程专家共识[J].中国实用妇科与产科杂志，2016，32（6）：535-540.
|
| [3] |
Wang Y，Hedman L，Perdomo MF，et al.Microsphere-based antibody assays for human parvovirus B19V，CMV and T.gondii[J].BMC Infect Dis，2016，16：8.
|
| [4] |
林立鹏，刘泽滨，王斌，等.首胎孕妇及二胎孕妇的TORCH临床感染情况[J].检验医学与临床，2017，14（8）：1179-1181.
|
| [5] |
孙玲玲，邓学东，梁泓，等.产前超声在妊娠期多病原体感染胎儿诊断中的应用[J].中华医学超声杂志电子版，2014，11（7）：41-45.
|
| [6] |
翟晓利，朱芳，王利霞，等.女性下生殖道单纯疱疹病毒感染 69 例临床病理分析[J].中华病理学杂志，2018，47（2）：128-129.
|
| [7] |
何天文，黄滨梅，钟志成，等.广东地区育龄女性TORCH感染筛查结果分析[J].国际检验医学杂志，2016，37（1）：67-68．
|
| [8] |
靳庆娥，谷俊朝，苏建荣.2015年北京地区孕前妇女血清TORCH抗体及TNF-α水平检测与相关分析[J].现代检验医学杂志，2016，31（3）：105-107．
|
| [9] |
曾莎，曹龙滨，李军.孕妇血清TORCH检查中IgM及IgG的临床分析[J].医学信息，2014，27（10）：24.
|
| [10] |
林晓萍，刘建军，邱惠萍，等.疱疹病毒感染与不良妊娠结局相关性的研究进展[J].中华微生物学和免疫学杂志，2014，34（4）：219-322.
|
| [11] |
王梅芬，王庆芳，刘家田.TORCH感染状况在育龄夫妇中趋势分析[J]．中国热带医学，2013，13（9）：1090-1092．
|
| [12] |
刘颖，申爽，奉淼.化学发光免疫分析技术在孕妇产前TORCH检测中的临床意义[J].中国民康医学，2015，27（1）：23-24.
|
| [13] |
颜霞，肖雪莲.化学发光法检测TORCH抗体的方法学评价[J].现代仪器与医疗，2017，23（3）：77-79.
|
| [14] |
张琳.孕前与孕早期检测TORCH临床分析[J].当代医学，2017，23（3）：124-125.
|
| [15] |
崔文彩，刘凤洁.370例孕前检查女性TORCH感染情况分析[J].国际病毒学杂志，2016，23（1）：41-43．
|
| [16] |
黄美虹，许幼仕，许荣海.815例孕前及孕早期妇女TORCH筛查情况分析[J].中国民康医学，2014，26（16）：66-67.
|
| [17] |
朱晓娥，袁耿彪，范永增，等.2861例妊娠期妇女TORCH筛查结果回顾性分析[J].国际检验医学杂志，2013，34（5）：535-536．
|
| [18] |
代小英，熊玮平，姜楠.化学发光免疫分析技术检测孕妇TORCH感染的结果分析[J].国际检验医学杂志，2016，37（9）：1278-1279．
|
| [19] |
吴敏芳，董明治.曲靖地区TORCH感染情况分析[J].国际检验医学杂志，2017，38（5）：601-603．
|
| [20] |
梁福笑，余勋，叶婉玲，等.东莞地区育龄妇女孕前、孕早期 TORCH 筛查研究[J].中国当代医药，2018，25（3）：129-131.
|
|
|
|
