We analyzed the performance parameters of the traditional and the reverse algorithms to find out which one is more convenient for serodiagnosis of syphilis. In total, 4789 serum samples were obtained in a cross-sectional study. Venereal Disease Research Laboratory (VDRL), Treponema pallidum Haemagglutination Assay (TPHA) and Chemiluminescent Microparticle Immunoassay (CMIA) tests were performed for every serum sample. In case of discordance between results, the TPHA was applied as a second treponemal test. Overall, 207 patients were serodiagnosed with syphilis. Among 4789 subjects tested, 125 (2.6%) and 206 (4.3%) were positive using the traditional algorithm and the reverse algorithm, respectively. The missed diagnosis rate of the traditional algorithm was 42.5%. The reverse algorithm had higher sensitivity than the traditional algorithm. Sensitivity levels of the traditional and the reverse algorithms were 57.49% and 99.85% respectively. The false positivity of the reverse algorithms was 0.02%.

我们分析了传统算法和反向算法的性能参数，找出哪一种更便于梅毒的血清诊断。在一项横断面研究中总共获得了 4789 份血清样本。对每个血清样本进行性病研究实验室 (VDRL)、梅毒螺旋体血凝试验 (TPHA) 和化学发光微粒免疫试验 (CMIA) 测试。在结果不一致的情况下，TPHA 被用作第二个密螺旋体测试。总体而言，207 名患者被血清学诊断为梅毒。在测试的 4789 名受试者中，使用传统算法和反向算法分别有 125 名（2.6%）和 206 名（4.3%）为阳性。传统算法的漏诊率为42.5%。逆向算法比传统算法具有更高的灵敏度。传统算法和反向算法的敏感度分别为57.49%和99.85%。反向算法的误报率为 0.02%。