[Comparison of two techniques of automated screening in respiratory and food allergy (UniCAP versus IMMULITE)].
Screening tests plays an essential part in primary allergy diagnosis, therefore they have to show the highest level of reliability. In order to assess how UniCAP system fulfill these requirements, in comparison with Immulite, we analysed the results obtained with Phadiatop, (UniCAP) and AlaTOP (IMMULITE) in 110 patients with a clinical positive diagnosis for inhalant allergy. Furthermore we compared the results from food allergy screening tests performed in 103 patients with a clinical positive diagnosis for food allergy and we analysed 110 tests results of controls with negative diagnosis for allergy. We obtained the following results: [table: see text] Samples for which the tests results were not in concordance with the clinical diagnosis were tested with the follow up panel of the different screening tests. We obtained a better concordance with Phadiatop, than with Alatop. Specificity of the inhalant allergy screening tests is the same in the two systems. We also obtained a better concordance with fx5 than with fp5. We conclude on the basis of their respective clinical sensitivity that both Phadiatop and fx5, available on UniCAP, better answer inhalant and food allergy screening needs than Alatop and fp5, available on Immulite.
Costongs
G M
GM
Département de biochimie, Maaslandziekenhuis, Sittard, Pays-Bas.
Bas
B M
BM
D000293:Adolescent; D000368:Aged; D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D005260:Female; D005512:Food Hypersensitivity / Q000175:diagnosis*; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D012130:Respiratory Hypersensitivity / Q000175:diagnosis*; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity
Comparaison de deux techniques de dépistage automatisées en allergie respiratoire et alimentaire (UniCAP versus IMMULITE).