Chlamydienscreening: Ist das Nachweisproblem gelöst [Screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: is the diagnostic efficacy good enough?].
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_C451E6005B54
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Chlamydienscreening: Ist das Nachweisproblem gelöst [Screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: is the diagnostic efficacy good enough?].
Journal
Gynäkologisch-geburtshilfliche Rundschau
ISSN
1018-8843 (Print)
ISSN-L
1018-8843
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2000
Volume
40
Number
3-4
Pages
134-139
Language
german
Notes
Publication types: Comparative Study ; English Abstract ; Journal Article Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the background of discrepant results of C. trachomatis testing in women with suspected genital infections, three different tests have been compared.
METHOD: 594 endocervical swabs were collected from women visiting the family planning clinic in Aarau. Each of the following tests was evaluated: Cobas Amplicor Chlamydia trachomatis, IF Chlamyset, and Chlamydia IF direct. If one of these three tests was positive, the fixed material on the slides was scraped off, and a PCR was performed.
RESULTS: 15 out of 594 samples were "true'-positive. PCR recognized 14 of them, the IF Chlamyset 13, and the Chlamydia IF 8. With the IF Chlamyset 37 samples were false-positive.
CONCLUSIONS: PCR testing exhibits a good sensitivity and a high specificity, but we think that the sensitivity can be increased by improving the sample preparation step. The Chlamydia IF direct has a good specificity, but a rather low sensitivity. It should be noted that the PCR has the potential to become a new gold standard for the detection of C. trachomatis.
METHOD: 594 endocervical swabs were collected from women visiting the family planning clinic in Aarau. Each of the following tests was evaluated: Cobas Amplicor Chlamydia trachomatis, IF Chlamyset, and Chlamydia IF direct. If one of these three tests was positive, the fixed material on the slides was scraped off, and a PCR was performed.
RESULTS: 15 out of 594 samples were "true'-positive. PCR recognized 14 of them, the IF Chlamyset 13, and the Chlamydia IF 8. With the IF Chlamyset 37 samples were false-positive.
CONCLUSIONS: PCR testing exhibits a good sensitivity and a high specificity, but we think that the sensitivity can be increased by improving the sample preparation step. The Chlamydia IF direct has a good specificity, but a rather low sensitivity. It should be noted that the PCR has the potential to become a new gold standard for the detection of C. trachomatis.
Keywords
Chlamydia Infections/diagnosis, Chlamydia Infections/transmission, Chlamydia trachomatis, Female, Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Direct, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical/prevention & control, Mass Screening, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Predictive Value of Tests, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Complications, Infectious/diagnosis, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Bacterial/diagnosis
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
09/11/2014 16:46
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:39
Usage data
