Table 2.
anti-CL IgG | MLDA | anti-CL IgM | MLDA | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
positive | negative | n | positive | negative | n | ||||
ELISA | positive | 32 | 15 | 47 | ELISA | positive | 22 | 11 | 33 |
negative | 11 | 171 | 182 | negative | 20 | 176 | 196 | ||
n | 43 | 186 | 229 | n | 42 | 187 | 229 | ||
anti-β2 GPI IgG | MLDA | anti-β2 GPI IgM | MLDA | ||||||
positive | negative | n | positive | negative | n | ||||
ELISA | positive | 24 | 3 | 27 | ELISA | positive | 21 | 16 | 37 |
negative | 7 | 195 | 202 | negative | 14 | 178 | 192 | ||
n | 31 | 198 | 229 | n | 35 | 194 | 229 |
Investigating 85 APS patients, 65 DC patients, and 79 NHS in ELISA and MDLA, no statistical difference could be detected for both techniques. According to the McNemar test, differences for anti-CL IgG (1.75%, 95% CI: -2.97% to 6.05%), anti-CL IgM (3.93%, 95% CI: -1.25% to 8.33%), anti-β2 GPI IgG (1.75%, 95 CI: -1.33% to 3.78%), and anti- β2 GPI IgM (0.87%, 95% CI: -4.11% to 5.67%) were not significant (P = 0.5563, P = 0.1508, P = 0.3438, and P = 0.1508, respectively). anti-β2 GPI, anti-beta2-glycoprotein I;
anti-CL, anti-cardiolipin; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent immunoassay; MLDA, multi-line dot assay.