Literature DB >> 21097811

Impact of intensified testing for urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infections: a randomised study with 9-year follow-up.

Berit Andersen1, Irene van Valkengoed, Ineta Sokolowski, Jens K Møller, Lars Østergaard, Frede Olesen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: DNA amplification assays are increasingly being used to facilitate the testing of asymptomatic individuals for urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis. The long-term clinical benefit in terms of avoided infertility and ectopic pregnancy is unknown.
METHODS: In 1997, 15,459 women and 14,980 men aged 21-23 years were living in Aarhus County, Denmark. A random sample of 4000 women and 5000 men was contacted by mail and offered the opportunity to be tested for C trachomatis by means of a sample obtained at home and mailed directly to the laboratory. The remaining 11,459 women and 9980 men received usual care and constituted the control population. All men and women were subsequently followed for 9 years by the use of Danish health registers. Data were collected on pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), ectopic pregnancy (EP), infertility diagnoses, in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment and births in women, and on epididymitis in men. The intervention and control groups were compared using Cox regression analyses and the intention-to-screen principle.
RESULTS: Among women, no differences were found between the intervention group and the control group: HR (95% CI) for PID 1.12 (0.70 to 1.79); EP 0.97 (0.63 to 1.51); infertility 0.87 (0.71 to 1.07); IVF treatment 0.88 (0.62 to 1.26) and births 1.02 (0.95 to 1.10). In men, the HR for epididymitis was 1.25 (0.70 to 2.24).
CONCLUSIONS: A population-based offer to be tested for urogenital C trachomatis infection by the use of non-invasive samples and DNA amplification did not reduce the long-term risk of reproductive complications in women or of epididymitis in men.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21097811     DOI: 10.1136/sti.2010.042192

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sex Transm Infect        ISSN: 1368-4973            Impact factor:   3.519


  10 in total

1.  Racial/Ethnic Disparities in the Lifetime Risk of Chlamydia trachomatis Diagnosis and Adverse Reproductive Health Outcomes Among Women in King County, Washington.

Authors:  Laura C Chambers; Christine M Khosropour; David A Katz; Julia C Dombrowski; Lisa E Manhart; Matthew R Golden
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 9.079

Review 2.  Screening for genital chlamydia infection.

Authors:  Nicola Low; Shelagh Redmond; Anneli Uusküla; Jan van Bergen; Helen Ward; Berit Andersen; Hannelore Götz
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-09-13

3.  Screening for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea in primary health care: protocol for systematic review.

Authors:  Jennifer Pillay; Ainsley Moore; Prinon Rahman; Gabriel Lewin; Donna Reynolds; John Riva; Guyléne Thériault; Brett Thombs; Brenda Wilson; Joan Robinson; Amanda Ramdyal; Geneviéve Cadieux; Robin Featherstone; Anne N Burchell; Jo-Anne Dillon; Ameeta Singh; Tom Wong; Marion Doull; Greg Traversy; Susan Courage; Tara MacGregor; Cydney Johnson; Ben Vandermeer; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2018-12-26

4.  Recommendation on screening for chlamydia and gonorrhea in primary care for individuals not known to be at high risk.

Authors:  Ainsley Moore; Gregory Traversy; Donna L Reynolds; John J Riva; Guylène Thériault; Brenda J Wilson; Melissa Subnath; Brett D Thombs
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2021-04-19       Impact factor: 8.262

5.  Screening for chlamydia and/or gonorrhea in primary health care: systematic reviews on effectiveness and patient preferences.

Authors:  Jennifer Pillay; Aireen Wingert; Tara MacGregor; Michelle Gates; Ben Vandermeer; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2021-04-19

Review 6.  Home-based versus clinic-based specimen collection in the management of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections.

Authors:  Luisa Fajardo-Bernal; Johanna Aponte-Gonzalez; Patrick Vigil; Edith Angel-Müller; Carlos Rincon; Hernando G Gaitán; Nicola Low
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-09-29

Review 7.  Home-based chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening: a systematic review of strategies and outcomes.

Authors:  Muhammad S Jamil; Jane S Hocking; Heidi M Bauer; Hammad Ali; Handan Wand; Kirsty Smith; Jennifer Walker; Basil Donovan; John M Kaldor; Rebecca J Guy
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2013-03-04       Impact factor: 3.295

8.  Systematic screening with information and home sampling for genital Chlamydia trachomatis infections in young men and women in Norway: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Hilde Kløvstad; Olav Natås; Aage Tverdal; Preben Aavitsland
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2013-01-23       Impact factor: 3.090

9.  Screening is not associated with reduced incidence of gonorrhoea or chlamydia in men who have sex with men (MSM); an ecological study of 23 European countries.

Authors:  Chris Kenyon
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2019-02-06

Review 10.  The Immune Characteristics of the Epididymis and the Immune Pathway of the Epididymitis Caused by Different Pathogens.

Authors:  Hu Zhao; Caiqian Yu; Chunyu He; Chunlei Mei; Aihua Liao; Donghui Huang
Journal:  Front Immunol       Date:  2020-09-30       Impact factor: 7.561

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.