Literature DB >> 2653270

Clinical and laboratory considerations of culture vs antigen assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis from genital specimens.

J A Kellogg1.   

Abstract

Assays for Chlamydia trachomatis antigen are being increasingly used in lieu of traditional cell culture methods for detection of the organism in patient specimens. While results from these assays are available considerably earlier than are those from culture, the assays have been less sensitive and specific than culture when used in some patient populations. This review summarizes results from investigations into the performance of culture and the two most widely used antigen assays, documents factors that can contribute to false-positive or false-negative results, and, in light of these factors, makes recommendations for the selection of methods for detection of C trachomatis from genital specimens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2653270

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Pathol Lab Med        ISSN: 0003-9985            Impact factor:   5.534


  23 in total

1.  Value of confirmation of Chlamydiazyme enzyme immunoassay results in the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  H Hallander; P Jonsson; B Gästrin
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.267

2.  Accuracy of two enzyme immunoassays and cell culture in the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in low and high risk populations in Senegal.

Authors:  E Van Dyck; N Samb; A D Sarr; L Van de Velden; J Moran; S Mboup; I Ndoye; J L Lamboray; A Meheus; P Piot
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Is a test of cure necessary following treatment for cervical infection with Chlamydia trachomatis?

Authors:  K W Radcliffe; D Rowen; D E Mercey; G Mumtaz; G L Ridgway; A J Robinson; J S Bingham
Journal:  Genitourin Med       Date:  1990-12

Review 4.  Laboratory techniques for the diagnosis of chlamydial infections.

Authors:  D Taylor-Robinson; B J Thomas
Journal:  Genitourin Med       Date:  1991-06

5.  Head-to-head evaluation of five chlamydia tests relative to a quality-assured culture standard.

Authors:  W J Newhall; R E Johnson; S DeLisle; D Fine; A Hadgu; B Matsuda; D Osmond; J Campbell; W E Stamm
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 6.  Rapid viral diagnosis in perspective.

Authors:  P C Lee; P Hallsworth
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1990-06-02

7.  Effect of endocervical specimen quality on detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and on the incidence of false-positive results with the Chlamydiazyme method.

Authors:  J A Kellogg; J W Seiple; C L Murray; J S Levisky
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by the Gen-Probe AMPLIFIED Chlamydia Trachomatis Assay (AMP CT) in urine specimens from men and women and endocervical specimens from women.

Authors:  K A Crotchfelt; B Pare; C Gaydos; T C Quinn
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Comparison of the Syva MicroTrak enzyme immunoassay and Gen-Probe PACE 2 with cell culture for diagnosis of cervical Chlamydia trachomatis infection in a high-prevalence female population.

Authors:  L M Clarke; M F Sierra; B J Daidone; N Lopez; J M Covino; W M McCormack
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Evaluation of two rapid tests for the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections.

Authors:  H H Schubiner; W D LeBar; S Joseph; C Taylor; C Jemal
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 3.267

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.