| 06/19/04 - 08:33 PM  
 
|   #13 |
"Sakaki-" wrote: I'm not too sure myself, but there wouldn't be much point of ordering two tests that are so similar (namely in reference to E). An MHA-TP and a TPPA are virtually the same, except that the TPPA uses latex particles instead of sheep erythrocytes, so conducting the two of them would offer little extra information. If a pair of tests were to be ordered, a nontreponemal one and a treponemal one would be ordered (the pair of a screen and a diagnostic test). I'm wondering why an RPR would be ordered if the VDRL test was already positive. Both methods are subject to yielding false positives from hepatitis. I absolutely agree with Sakaki's point. This is a very good question but I haven't seen the conclusion of the discussion yet. Does each of the two pairs: VDRL/RPR and FTA/TPHA/MHA-TP has similar sensitivity and specificity? Guys, please keep on writing please.
___________________ I leave no trace of wings in the air, but I am glad I have had my flight
|
| Sakaki- Forum Senior
Topics: 1 Posts: 238
| | 06/21/04 - 11:52 AM  
 
|   #14 |
I'm pretty sure that the RPR is more commonly done than the VDRL, with the former usually giving higher titres as well.
|
|
| |
| | |