Abstract：Objective To compare and analyze the results of specific IgM and IgG antibodies to 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) detected by colloidal gold method and fluorescence immunochromatography so as to explore the law and characteristics of production of the antibodies. Methods Colloidal gold method and fluorescence immunochromatography were simultaneously used to detect specific IgM and IgG antibodies to 2019-nCoV in 87 blood samples from 28 confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and 42 blood samples as the control group without 2019-nCoV infection identified by nucleic acid detection. And statistical analyses of antibody detection results in different sampling time points were conducted. Results The sensitivities of IgM and IgG antibodies detected by colloidal gold method were 54.02% (47/87) and 93.10% (81/87), respectively, and the specificities were 100% (42/42) and 97.62% (41/42), respectively. The sensitivities of IgM and IgG antibodies detected by fluorescence immunochromatography were 93.10% (81/87) and 96.55% (84/87), respectively, and the specificities were both 97.62% (41/42). Both the methods showed that the average time of positive conversion of IgM and IgG antibodies was approximately 3 weeks, and IgM could persist for 50 days in blood. Fluorescence immunochromatography displayed that the concentration of IgM and IgG antibodies showed a trend of first rising and then falling, and reached the peak around 5 weeks. Conclusion The sensitivity of IgM antibody detected by fluorescence immunochromatography is significantly higher than that of colloidal gold method. No differences are found in the specificities of IgM and IgG antibodies detected by the two methods. Both the methods can be used for the screening of 2019-nCoV specific IgM and IgG antibodies. As an effective supplement to nucleic acid detection, the fluorescence immunochromatography can also dynamically monitor the changes in antibody concentration.
曾希鹏, 谢朝梅, 邓海斌, 程思杰. 胶体金法与荧光免疫层析法检测新型冠状病毒特异性IgM和IgG的比较分析[J]. 实用预防医学, 2021, 28(5): 580-583.
ZENG Xi-peng, XIE Chao-mei, DENG Hai-bin, CHENG Si-jie. Comparative analysis of colloidal gold method and fluorescence immunochromatographyfor the detection of specific IgM and IgG antibodies to 2019-nCoV. , 2021, 28(5): 580-583.
[1] Xu X,Chen P,Wang J,et al.Evolution of the novel coronavirus from the ongoing Wuhan outbreak and modeling of its spike protein for risk of human transmission[J].Sci China Life Sci,2020,63(3):457-460. [2] Huang C,Wang Y,Li X,et al.Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan,China[J].Lancet,2020,395(10223):497-506. [3] 钟慧钰,赵珍珍,宋兴勃,等.新型冠状病毒核酸临床检测要点及经验[J].国际检验医学杂志,2020,41(5):523-526. [4] 薛雄燕,朱嫦琳,黄少珍,等.血液样本灭活处理对三种SARS-CoV-2抗体检测方法结果的影响[J].南方医科大学学报,2020,40(3):316-320. [5] 张友春,汪睿,朱永良.新型冠状病毒实验室检测方法研究进展[J].预防医学,2020,32(4):361-365. [6] 国家卫生健康委员会办公厅,国家中医药管理局办公室.新型冠状病毒肺炎诊疗方案(试行第七版)[Z].2020-03-04. [7] 邓杰伦,王远芳,王婷婷,等.胶体金免疫层析发检测SARS-CoV-2血清抗体的临床价值探讨[J].国际检验医学杂志,2020,41(8):964-966,970. [8] 李芳彩,戴志辉,贺子翔,等.ELISA法与胶体金法在检测新型冠状病毒血清抗体中的应用[J].实用预防医学,2020,27(7):780-783. [9] 徐云云,李宗光,刘海燕,等.新型冠状病毒肺炎特异性IgM抗体两种方法检测比较分析[J].重庆医学,2020,14(1):531-534.
2021, Vol. 28 
