Comparison of multiple detection methods of Mycoplasma pneumoniae antibody for the early diagnosis of pediatric mycoplasma pneumonia. (April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Wu, Yan; Duan, Guikai; Cheng, Minggang; Wu, Weiqing; Yu, Qin; Yu, Dapeng
• Is Part Of: European journal of inflammation. Volume 17(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-04
• Subjects: acridine ester chemiluminescence -- consistency analysis -- enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay -- Mycoplasma pneumoniae -- Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia -- passive agglutination method; Inflammation -- Periodicals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents -- therapeutic use -- Periodicals; Immunotherapy -- Periodicals; Inflammation -- Periodicals; Anti-inflammatory agents -- Periodicals; Immunotherapy -- Periodicals; Anti-inflammatory agents; Immunotherapy; Inflammation; Periodicals; 616.0473
• DOI: 10.1177/2058739219838712
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1721-727X

Abstract

Mycoplasma pneumoniae pneumonia (MPP) is a common disease in infants and young children. MPP can also be a potential cause of healthcare-associated pneumonia. However, it is challenging to make an accurate diagnosis in a timely fashion. Our goal is to determine the assay consistencies of acridinium ester chemiluminescence immunoassay (AECLIA) and gelatin particle agglutination (GPA) test for the detection of Mycoplasma pneumoniae (MP) antibody. In this study, a total of 1404 children with suspected MPP were enrolled. Among them, 130 were diagnosed as MPP positive by mycoplasma culture, and 186 were negative. MP antibodies were detected by AECLIA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and GPA. Consistency rates, differences among assays, and diagnosis performance were compared for the three methods. The independent χ 2 test results of AECLIA and ELISA for the detection of MP-IgG and MP-IgM antibodies were χ 2 = 29.210, P < 0.001; χ 2 = 9.081, P = 0.017, respectively, suggesting that the two detection methods are well correlated. Similar analyses were done for the comparison of AECLIA and GPA as well as the comparison of ELISA and GPA. The positive rates of these methods agree with epidemiology data and have good consistency. Thus, AECLIA with a much shorter assay time could be a better option for the screening of MPP.