Lenka A Vodstrcil1, Ruthy McIver2, Wilhelmina M Huston3, Sepehr N Tabrizi4, Peter Timms5, Jane S Hocking6. 1. Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne Melbourne Sexual Health Centre, Carlton Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville. 2. Sydney Sexual Health Centre, South Eastern Sydney Local Health District, Sydney. 3. Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. 4. Murdoch Children's Research Institute, Parkville Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Melbourne, The Royal Women's Hospital. 5. Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane University of the Sunshine Coast, Sippy Downs, Australia. 6. Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The role of organism load in Chlamydia trachomatis infection is not well understood. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the epidemiology of C. trachomatis organism load in human genital chlamydia infection. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases were searched for literature published through August 2014. English-language publications that quantified load in humans were eligible. Participant characteristics and laboratory data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 737 records were identified, and 29 publications involving 40 883 participants were included. In women, load was highest for cervical swabs and lowest for urine specimens. In men, load was highest for rectal swabs and similar for urethral swabs and urine specimens. Evidence of any association between load and age, serovar, risk of transmission, hormone levels, and concurrent sexually transmitted infections was inconsistent. Eight of 9 culture-based studies found an association between load and signs and symptoms, in contrast with only 3 of 8 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-based studies (P = .03). CONCLUSION: Chlamydia organism load varies by specimen type and site of sampling, and viable chlamydia organism load may be a more important indicator of severity of infection than total load measured by NAAT.
BACKGROUND: The role of organism load in Chlamydia trachomatis infection is not well understood. We conducted a systematic review to investigate the epidemiology of C. trachomatis organism load in humangenital chlamydia infection. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, and Medline databases were searched for literature published through August 2014. English-language publications that quantified load in humans were eligible. Participant characteristics and laboratory data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 737 records were identified, and 29 publications involving 40 883 participants were included. In women, load was highest for cervical swabs and lowest for urine specimens. In men, load was highest for rectal swabs and similar for urethral swabs and urine specimens. Evidence of any association between load and age, serovar, risk of transmission, hormone levels, and concurrent sexually transmitted infections was inconsistent. Eight of 9 culture-based studies found an association between load and signs and symptoms, in contrast with only 3 of 8 nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT)-based studies (P = .03). CONCLUSION:Chlamydia organism load varies by specimen type and site of sampling, and viable chlamydia organism load may be a more important indicator of severity of infection than total load measured by NAAT.
Authors: Lucian Visan; Violette Sanchez; Margaux Kania; Aymeric de Montfort; Luis M de la Maza; Salvador Fernando Ausar Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother Date: 2016-04-22 Impact factor: 3.452
Authors: Jan Henk Dubbink; Dewi J de Waaij; Myrte Bos; Lisette van der Eem; Cécile Bébéar; Nontembeko Mbambazela; Sander Ouburg; Remco P H Peters; Servaas A Morré Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Tiffany R Phillips; Christopher K Fairley; Kate Maddaford; Jennifer Danielewski; Jane S Hocking; David Lee; Deborah A Williamson; Gerald Murray; Fabian Kong; Vesna De Petra; Catriona S Bradshaw; Marcus Y Chen; Rebecca Wigan; Anthony Snow; Benjamin P Howden; Suzanne M Garland; Eric P F Chow Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2019-12-23 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: K Gupta; R K Bakshi; B Van Der Pol; G Daniel; L Brown; C G Press; R Gorwitz; J Papp; J Y Lee; W M Geisler Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 2.451
Authors: Laura Dize; Perry Barnes; Mathilda Barnes; Yu-Hsiang Hsieh; Vincent Marsiglia; Della Duncan; Justin Hardick; Charlotte A Gaydos Journal: Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis Date: 2016-07-25 Impact factor: 2.803
Authors: Brian M O Ogendi; Rakesh K Bakshi; Kanupriya Gupta; Richa Kapil; LaDraka T Brown; Stephen J Jordan; Steffanie Sabbaj; Christen G Press; Jeannette Y Lee; William M Geisler Journal: Microbes Infect Date: 2017-12-26 Impact factor: 2.700
Authors: F Y S Kong; S N Tabrizi; C K Fairley; S Phillips; G Fehler; M Law; L A Vodstrcil; M Chen; C S Bradshaw; J S Hocking Journal: Epidemiol Infect Date: 2016-05-16 Impact factor: 4.434