Literature DB >> 3536504

Comparison of cell culture with two direct Chlamydia tests using immunofluorescence or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.

P Pothier, A Kazmierczak.   

Abstract

Two direct tests for diagnosis of infection due to Chlamydia trachomatis were evaluated on 417 specimens collected from a population with a low disease prevalence of 8.1%. The intensity of positive results was graded according to the number of inclusions or elementary bodies and the optical density of the reaction. Thirty-four specimens were positive in cell culture, 39 positive with MicroTrak and 43 positive with Chlamydiazyme assay. The sensitivity of the two direct tests was 91.2% (31 of 34); the specificity was 97.9% (381 of 389) for MicroTrak and 96.9% (377 of 389) for Chlamydiazyme assay. The positive predictive values were 79.5% (31 of 39) for MicroTrak and 72.1% (31 of 43) for Chlamydiazyme assay. None of the specimens negative by the culture method were positive by the two direct methods. Discrepancies were restricted to the slightly positive specimens. The direct tests seem to be an alternative for diagnosing Chlamydia trachomatis infections, but slightly positive results require cell culture confirmation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3536504     DOI: 10.1007/BF02017707

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0722-2211            Impact factor:   3.267


  20 in total

1.  Interference of Staphylococcus aureus in the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  T Krech; D Gerhard-Fsadni; N Hofmann; S M Miller
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-05-18       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Indirect immunofluorescence staining of Chlamydia trachomatis inclusions in microculture plates with monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  M Zapata; M Chernesky; J Mahony
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1984-06       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Rapid diagnosis of chlamydial infections with the MicroTrak direct test.

Authors:  C T Uyeda; P Welborn; N Ellison-Birang; K Shunk; B Tsaouse
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  The Chlamydia epidemic.

Authors:  K K Holmes
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1981-05-01       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  [Chlamydia trachomatis: detection using a direct test and culture in 100 genital specimens].

Authors:  B Dutilh; C Bebear
Journal:  Ann Biol Clin (Paris)       Date:  1985       Impact factor: 0.459

6.  Direct fluorescent monoclonal antibody stain for rapid detection of infant Chlamydia trachomatis infections.

Authors:  T A Bell; C C Kuo; W E Stamm; M R Tam; R S Stephens; K K Holmes; J T Grayston
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  1984-08       Impact factor: 7.124

7.  Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections by direct immunofluorescence staining of genital secretions. A multicenter trial.

Authors:  W E Stamm; H R Harrison; E R Alexander; L D Cles; M R Spence; T C Quinn
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1984-11       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Sensitivity of immunofluorescence with monoclonal antibodies for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis inclusions in cell culture.

Authors:  R S Stephens; C C Kuo; M R Tam
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1982-07       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis inclusions in Mccoy cell cultures with fluorescein-conjugated monoclonal antibodies.

Authors:  W E Stamm; M Tam; M Koester; L Cles
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1983-04       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Microtest procedure for isolation of Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  B L Yoder; W E Stamm; C M Koester; E R Alexander
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 5.948

View more
  12 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  Laboratory techniques for the diagnosis of chlamydial infections.

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

3.  Comparison of three techniques for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical specimens from asymptomatic women.

Authors:  J Lefebvre; H Laperrière; H Rousseau; R Massé
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 4.  Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections.

Authors:  C M Black
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 26.132

5.  Effect of patient characteristics on performance of an enzyme immunoassay for detecting cervical Chlamydia trachomatis infection.

Authors:  L S Magder; K C Klontz; L H Bush; R C Barnes
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1990-04       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Influence of storing urogenital specimens at -20 degrees C before testing by enzyme amplified immunoassay (IDEIA) to detect Chlamydia trachomatis antigen.

Authors:  S Bygdeman; C Teichert; A Ahlin; P Lidbrink; H A Jama
Journal:  Genitourin Med       Date:  1989-04

7.  Comparison of three non-culture techniques for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in genital tract specimens.

Authors:  C J Hall; C Nelder
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1989-10       Impact factor: 3.267

8.  Simplified culture procedure for large-scale screening for Chlamydia trachomatis infections.

Authors:  M I Lees; D M Newnan; S M Garland
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1988-07       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Solid phase enzyme immunoassay for detection of non-complicated cervical infection with Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  J van Ulsen; J H Wagenvoort; R V van Eijk; E Stolz
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1988-10       Impact factor: 3.267

10.  Evaluation of the Biostar Chlamydia OIA assay with specimens from women attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic.

Authors:  M S Pate; P B Dixon; K Hardy; M Crosby; E W Hook
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.