Comparative study of direct and indirect immunofluorescence and of bullous pemphigoid 180 and 230 enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays for diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid

Direct immunofluorescence (DIF), indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are used for the laboratory diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid (BP). The diagnostic value of DIF and IIF on rabbit and monkey esophagus or human salt-split skin and commercial ELISAs was as...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology Jg. 69; H. 5; S. 748 - 753
Hauptverfasser: Sárdy, Miklós, Kostaki, Dimitra, Varga, Rita, Peris, Ketty, Ruzicka, Thomas
Format: Journal Article
Sprache:Englisch
Veröffentlicht: United States Elsevier Inc 01.11.2013
Schlagworte:
ISSN:0190-9622, 1097-6787, 1097-6787
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Direct immunofluorescence (DIF), indirect immunofluorescence (IIF), and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) are used for the laboratory diagnosis of bullous pemphigoid (BP). The diagnostic value of DIF and IIF on rabbit and monkey esophagus or human salt-split skin and commercial ELISAs was assessed. This was a single-center retrospective study where 313 patients with BP were compared with 488 control subjects. DIF was the most sensitive test (90.8%) whereas sensitivities for IIF on rabbit esophagus, IIF on monkey esophagus, IIF on salt-split skin, BP180 ELISA, and BP230 ELISA were 76.0%, 73.2%, 73.3%, 72.0%, and 59.0%, respectively. The sensitivity of the serologic tests was 88.8% altogether. The specificities for DIF, IIF on rabbit esophagus, IIF on monkey esophagus, IIF on salt-split skin, BP180 ELISA, and BP230 ELISA were 98%, 96.5%, 97.1%, 100%, 94.1%, and 99.2%, respectively. The retrospective nature of study was a limitation. Correlation of diagnostic data with clinical manifestations or disease course was not possible. In suspected BP, both serologic tests and DIF have to be performed because of a sensitivity issue. Although the ELISAs had a relatively low sensitivity, the serologic tests altogether almost reached the level of sensitivity of DIF. The specificities of all assays were excellent.
Bibliographie:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0190-9622
1097-6787
1097-6787
DOI:10.1016/j.jaad.2013.07.009