口腔医学 ›› 2026, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (8): 609-612.doi: 10.13591/j.cnki.kqyx.2026.08.007

• 基础与临床研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

直接镜检法与抗原检测法在口腔念珠菌病诊断中的应用比较

张璐玢1,2,3, 钱岷江1,2,3, 单婧2,3,4, 朱晓洁1,2,3, 陈远1,2,3, 刘畅1,2,3, 克甜甜1,2,3, 吴姗姗1,2,3()   

  1. 1 南京医科大学附属口腔医院检验科, 江苏南京 (210029)
    2 口腔疾病研究与防治国家级重点实验室培育建设点(南京医科大学), 江苏南京 (210029)
    3 江苏省口腔转化医学工程研究中心(南京医科大学), 江苏南京 (210029)
    4 南京医科大学附属口腔医院口腔黏膜病科, 江苏南京 (210029)
  • 收稿日期:2025-07-25 出版日期:2026-08-28 发布日期:2026-08-24
  • 通讯作者: 吴姗姗 E-mail:wuyishan1983@163.com
  • 基金资助:
    江苏省科教能力提升工程——江苏省研究型医院(YJXYYJSDW4);江苏省医学创新中心(CXZX202227)

Comparison of direct microscopic examination and antigen detection methods for the diagnosis of oral candidiasis

ZHANG Lubin1,2,3, QIAN Minjiang1,2,3, SHAN Jing2,3,4, ZHU Xiaojie1,2,3, CHEN Yuan1,2,3, LIU Chang1,2,3, KE Tiantian1,2,3, WU Shanshan1,2,3()   

  1. 1 Department of Clinical Laboratory, The Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, China
  • Received:2025-07-25 Online:2026-08-28 Published:2026-08-24

摘要:

目的 比较直接镜检法、抗原检测法两种方法对口腔白念珠菌感染情况的检测效果,为临床选择快速检测方法提供依据。方法 收集2024年12月—2025年2月于南京医科大学附属口腔医院口腔黏膜病科就诊疑似口腔念珠菌病患者的口腔拭子,分别采用直接镜检法、抗原检测法、培养法3种方法对同一患者标本进行检测,以培养法为金标准,比较其他两种方法阳性率是否有差异,与培养法结果是否具有一致性,并比较灵敏度、特异度、假阴性率、假阳性率、阴性预测值、阳性预测值。结果 抗原检测法阳性率明显高于直接镜检法(P<0.01),两种检测方法与培养法结果均具有一致性(P<0.05),且抗原检测法(Kappa=0.417)一致性程度更高。白念珠菌抗原检测法灵敏度、阴性预测值、阳性预测值明显高于直接镜检法(P<0.05),假阴性率显著低于直接镜检法(P<0.01),特异度、假阳性率两者差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论 抗原检测法比直接镜检法有更高的阳性率、灵敏度、阴性预测值、阳性预测值和更低的假阴性率;与培养法结果一致性程度更高,更适宜用于临床快速诊断。

关键词: 白念珠菌, 直接镜检, 抗原检测, 培养

Abstract:

Objective To compare the detection efficacy of direct microscopic examination and antigen detection in oral candidiasis infection, and provide a basis for clinical selection of rapid detection methods. Methods Oral swabs were collected from patients with suspected oral candidiasis in the Department of Oral Mucosal Diseases at Affiliated Stomatological Hospital of Nanjing Medical University between December 2024 and February 2025. Each specimen was detected by direct microscopic examination, antigen detection and cultivation method. Using the cultivation method as the gold standard, the positive rates of the other two methods were assessed, and the consistency with the cultivation method, and various evaluation indices such as sensitivity, specificity, false negative rate, false positive rate, negative predictive value and positive predictive value were compared. Results The antigen detection method demonstrated a significantly higher positive rate than the direct microscopic examination (P<0.01). Both methods showed consistency with the results of the cultivation method (P<0.05), and the antigen detection method (Kappa=0.417) had a higher degree of consistency. The sensitivity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of the Candida albicans antigen detection were significantly higher than those of the direct microscopic examination (P<0.05) and the false negative rate was significantly lower than that of the direct microscopic examination (P<0.01). The difference in specificity and false positive rate between the two methods was not significant (P>0.05). Conclusion The antigen detection method has higher positive rate, sensitivity, negative predictive value, positive predictive value and lower false negative rate. It also has a higher degree of consistency with cultivation method. Therefore it is more suitable for rapid clinical diagnosis.

Key words: Candida albicans, direct microscopic examination, antigen detection, cultivation

中图分类号: