Evaluation of two rapid tests for the diagnosis ofChlamydia trachomatis genital infections
Abstract
The performance of two new enzyme immunoassays (EIA) for the detection ofChlamydia trachomatis in a practice setting was compared. A consecutive series of 207 female patients seen at an inner-city sexually transmitted disease clinic were tested by cell culture, the Kodak SureCell (SC) and Abbott TestPack Chlamydia (TP) EIAs. In addition 210 male patients, selected by physicians on the basis of the fact that multiple urethral samples could be obtained, were tested by cell culture and SC. The prevalence of infection was 19 % in the females and 12.5 % in males. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for the SC and TP were 88 %, 95 %, 81 %, 97 % and 59 %, 99 %, 95 %, 91 %, respectively, in the female population. The sensitivity of the SC was significantly greater than that of the TP (p ≤ 0.002). The performance values of the SC in men (in the same order) were 64 %, 96 %, 71 % and 95 %, respectively. The SC in male patients and the TP in female patients had low sensitivity. The sensitivity of the SC in female patients was significantly higher than that of the TP. However, the SC yielded more false positive results. To determine the utility of these tests in a practice setting further studies are required.
Keywords
Cell Culture Internal Medicine Positive Result Female Patient Male PatientPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Schachter J: Why we need a program for the control ofChlamydia trachomatis. New England Journal of Medicine 1989, 320: 802–803.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Phillips RS, Aronson MD, Taylor WC, Safran C: Should tests forChlamydia trachomatis cervical infection be done during routine gynecologic visits? Annals of Internal Medicine 1987, 107: 188–194.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 3.Chacko MR, Lovechick JC:Chlamydia trachomatis infection in sexually active adolescents: prevalence and risk factors. Pediatrics 1984, 73: 836–840.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.Schafer MA, Beck A, Blain B, Dole P, Irwin CE, Sweet R, Schachter J:Chlamydia trachomatis: important relationships to race, contraception, lower genital tract infection and Papanicolau smear. Journal of Pediatrics 1984, 104: 141–146.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Golden N, Hammerschlag M, Newuhoff S, Gleyzer A: Prevalence ofChlamydia trachomatis in female adolescents. American Journal of Diseases in Children 1984, 138: 562–564.Google Scholar
- 6.Soren K, Willis E:Chlamydia and the adolescent girl. The enzyme immunoassay as a screening tool. American Journal of Diseases in Children 1989, 143: 51–54.Google Scholar
- 7.Stamm WE: Diagnosis ofChlamydia trachomatis genitourinary infections. Annals of Internal Medicine 1988, 108: 710–717.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Needham CA: Rapid detection methods in microbiology: are they right for your office? Medical Clinics of North America 1987, 71: 591–605.Google Scholar
- 9.LeBar W, Herschman B, Jemal C, Pierzchala J: Comparison of DNA probe, monoclonal antibody enzyme immunoassay, and cell culture for the detection ofChlamydia trachomatis. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1989, 27: 826–828.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Coleman P, Varitek V, Mushshwar IK, Marchlewicz B, Safford J, Hansen J, Kurpiewski G, Grier T: Test-PackChlamydia, a new rapid assay for the direct detection ofChlamydia trachomatis. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1989, 27: 2811–2814.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Kellogg JA: Clinical and laboratory considerations of culture vs antigen assays for detection ofChlamydia trachomatis. Archives of Pathological Laboratory Medicine 1989, 113: 453–460.Google Scholar
- 12.Taylor-Robinson D, Thomas BJ, Osborn MF: Evaluation of an enzyme immunoassay (Chlamydiazyme) for detectingChlamydia trachomatis in genital tract specimens. Journal of Clinical Pathology 1987, 40: 194–199.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Cherensky MA, Mahony JB, Castriciano S, Mores M, Stewart IO, Landis SJ, Seidelman W, Sargeant EJ, Leman C: Detection ofChlamydia trachomatis antigens by enzyme immunoassay and immunofluorescence in genital specimens from symptomatic and asymptomatic men and women. Journal of Infectious Diseases 1986, 154: 141–148.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 14.LeBar WD, Schubiner H, Jemal C, Herschman BR: Comparison of IDEIA III and cell culture for the detection ofChlamydia trachomatis in endocervical specimens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1990, 28: 1447–1448.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Reichart CA, Gaydos CA, Brady WE, Quinn TC, Hook EW: Evaluation of Abbott TestpackChlamydia for detection ofChlamydia trachomatis in patients attending sexually transmitted diseases clinics. Sexually Transmitted Diseases 1990, 17: 147–151.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Wildermann RF, Schneider KA: Regulatory and legal influences on physicians' office laboratories. Journal of the American Medical Association 1986, 256: 252–253.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.James K, Barret DA: Establishing a physician's office laboratory. Medical Clinics of North America 1987, 71: 691–703.PubMedGoogle Scholar