Table 4 |
||
|
Performance of various tests used for detection of specific antibodies |
||
|
Method |
Advantages |
Disadvantages |
|
|
||
|
IF-ANA |
Cost effective Easy to perform High sensitivity and specificity |
Time consuming Can give false positive results ENA categorization difficult Requires trained personnel |
|
ELISA |
Automated Potential for quantification High sensitivity Potential for antibody class definition |
Potential for false positives Expensive Requires purified antigen |
|
DID |
Cost effective High specificity Detects multiple antibodies at a time |
Low sensitivity Subjective interpretation Need for large volumes of prototype sera |
|
CIE |
Cost effective High specificity Detects multiple antibodies at a time Faster than double diffusion |
Modest sensitivity Subjective interpretation Need for large volumes of prototype sera |
|
PHA |
Semiquantitative High specificity |
Time consuming Needs purified antigen |
|
Western blot |
More sensitive than DID and CIE High specificity |
Expensive Time consuming Detects linear epitopes only |
|
Dot/Line blot |
Easy to perform, rapid High sensitivity and specificity Automation possible |
Qualitative Distinction between certain antibodies difficult |
|
MIA |
Detects multiple antibodies at a time Quantitation possible |
Expensive |
|
Flowcytometry |
Cost effective Automated High sensitivity |
Provides single result at a time |
|
Microarray |
Detects multiple antibodies at a time Complete automation possible High sensitivity and specificity Cost effective |
Not widely available |
|
|
||
|
Kumar et al. Diagnostic Pathology 2009 4:1 doi:10.1186/1746-1596-4-1 |
||
