Literature DB >> 8567894

Use of PCR and direct immunofluorescence microscopy for confirmation of results obtained by Syva MicroTrak Chlamydia enzyme immunoassay.

L Ostergaard1, J K Møller.   

Abstract

A procedure for use of the Amplicor Chlamydia PCR with the Syva MicroTrak enzyme immunoassay (EIA) medium was developed, and the performance of the Syva MicroTrak EIA was evaluated by use of PCR and the Syva MicroTrak direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) as confirmatory methods. PCR detected Chlamydia organisms at a 10-fold greater dilution than did DFA. Of 366 specimens, 119 specimens were positive by both PCR and DFA, 6 specimens were positive only by PCR, and 241 specimens were negative by both PCR and DFA. Subsequently, DFA and the developed PCR procedure were used prospectively for confirmation of EIA results in a defined negative gray zone between the cutoff value and 30% of the cutoff value (70% below the cutoff value). All specimens with results above the EIA cutoff value were also subjected to confirmation with DFA and PCR. EIA was performed on 7,748 endocervical swab specimens, of which 494 (6.4%) were subjected to confirmation, and on 968 male urethral swab specimens, of which 185 (19.1%) were subjected to confirmation. A "gold standard" was based on the findings by DFA and PCR, and divergent results were resolved by a major outer membrane protein-based PCR. Forty-five of 160 female specimens (28.1%) and 11 of 93 male specimens (11.8%) within the defined negative gray zone were found to be positive. Of 334 female specimens having absorbance unit (AU) values above the EIA cutoff value, 258 could be confirmed, thereby giving a positive predictive value of 77% (258/334). Accordingly, the positive predictive value with male specimens was 95% (87/92). The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis-positive specimens was 3.9% (303/7,748) in females and 10.1% (98/968) in males. All male specimens having AU values above 1.0 in the EIA were confirmed positive. In contrast to this, 16 females with AU values above 1.0 in the EIA could not be confirmed positive with either DFA or PCR. The mean age of these females was higher than that of patients testing negative for C. trachomatis (P < 0.005). This might suggest an age-dependent change in vaginal colonization with an organism(s) crossreacting in the EIA. Thus, the PCR procedure developed can be used for confirmation of EIA results, testing specimens with AU values in the defined negative gray zone improves the sensitivity of EIA, and all specimens testing positive in EIA should be subjected to confirmation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8567894      PMCID: PMC228542          DOI: 10.1128/jcm.33.10.2620-2623.1995

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  15 in total

1.  Confirmatory polymerase chain reaction testing for Chlamydia trachomatis in first-void urine from asymptomatic and symptomatic men.

Authors:  J B Mahony; K E Luinstra; J W Sellors; D Jang; M A Chernesky
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Use of polymerase chain reaction for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  L Ostergaard; S Birkelund; G Christiansen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in a low prevalence population.

Authors:  L Ostergaard
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 3.267

4.  A common plasmid of Chlamydia trachomatis.

Authors:  L Palmer; S Falkow
Journal:  Plasmid       Date:  1986-07       Impact factor: 3.466

5.  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

6.  The 7.5-kb plasmid present in Chlamydia trachomatis is not essential for the growth of this microorganism.

Authors:  E M Peterson; B A Markoff; J Schachter; L M de la Maza
Journal:  Plasmid       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 3.466

7.  Chlamydia trachomatis antigen detection by Chlamydiazyme combined with Chlamydia Blocking Reagent verification.

Authors:  B Zeeberg; I Thelin; C Schalén
Journal:  Int J STD AIDS       Date:  1992 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 1.359

8.  Underdiagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Diagnostic limitations in patients with low-level infection.

Authors:  J S Lin; W E Jones; L Yan; K A Wirthwein; E E Flaherty; R M Haivanis; P A Rice
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  1992 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 2.830

9.  Confirmatory testing of Chlamydia trachomatis Syva enzyme immunoassay gray zone specimens by Syva direct fluorescent antibody test.

Authors:  J L Beebe; M P Rau; K D Albrecht
Journal:  Sex Transm Dis       Date:  1993 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.830

10.  Direct detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in urine specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic men by using a rapid polymerase chain reaction assay.

Authors:  G Jaschek; C A Gaydos; L E Welsh; T C Quinn
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 5.948

View more
  6 in total

1.  Efficacy of home sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: randomised study.

Authors:  L Ostergaard; B Andersen; F Olesen; J K Moller
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1998-07-04

2.  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

3.  Lowering the cut off value of an automated chlamydia enzyme immunoassay and confirmation by PCR and direct immunofluorescent antibody test.

Authors:  C Y Tong; C Donnelly; N Hood
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Evaluation of the Vidas Chlamydia test to detect and verify Chlamydia trachomatis in urogenital specimens.

Authors:  J Schachter; R B Jones; R C Butler; B Rice; D Brooks; B Van der Pol; M Gray; J Moncada
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Comparison of performance and cost-effectiveness of direct fluorescent-antibody, ligase chain reaction, and PCR assays for verification of chlamydial enzyme immunoassay results for populations with a low to moderate prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis infection.

Authors:  D Dean; D Ferrero; M McCarthy
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Recurrence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infection evaluated by mailed samples obtained at home: 24 weeks' prospective follow up study.

Authors:  H O Kjaer; G Dimcevski; G Hoff; F Olesen; L Ostergaard
Journal:  Sex Transm Infect       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.519

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.