Skip to main content
Log in

Comparison of two enzyme immunoassays and an immunofluorescence test for detection ofChlamydia trachomatis

  • Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Three rapid methods for the detection ofChlamydia trachomatiswere compared: one immunofluorescence test and two enzyme immunoassays. Cervical and urethral specimens were obtained from 75 women in an outpatient clinic for therapeutic abortions and from 50 women in a sexually transmitted disease clinic. Urethral specimens were also obtained from 154 men in the same clinic. One hundred and nineteen cervical and 272 urethral specimens of a total 391 specimens were tested by the three methods. The direct immunofluorescence test detectedChlamydia trachomatisin 8 % and the two enzyme immunoassays in 10 % and 12 % of the patients. The sensitivity of the immunofluorescence test was 76 % compared to 91 % and 80 % for the two enzyme immunoassay tests. All three tests had a specificity of 99 %. Dilution experiments confirmed that one immunoassay test, Chlamydiazyme, detected most of the positive specimens. The rapid and easily automated enzyme immunoassays are a valuable complement to the culture technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Caul, E. O., Paul, I. D.: Monoclonal antibody based ELISA for detectingChlamydia trachomatis. Lancet 1985, i: 279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Jones, M. F., Smith, T. F., Houglum, A. J., Herrman, J. E.: Detection ofChlamydia trachomatis in genital specimens by the Chlamydiazyme test. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1984, 20: 465–467.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Mumtaz, G., Mellars, B. J., Ridgway, G. L., Oriel, J. D.: Enzyme immunoassay for the detection ofChlamydia trachomatis antigen in urethral and endocervical swabs. Journal of Clinical Pathology 1985, 38: 740–742.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Tam, M. R., Stamm, W. E., Handsfield, H. H., Stephens, R., Kuo, C.-C., Holmes, K. K., Ditzenberger, K., Krieger, M., Nowinski, R. C.: Culture-independent diagnosis ofChlamydia trachomatis using monoclonal antibodies. New England Journal of Medicine 1984, 310: 1146–1150.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ripa, K. T., Mårdh, P. A.: Cultivation ofChlamydia trachomatis in cycloheximide-treated McCoy cells. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1977, 6: 328–331.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lidbrink, P., Blümberg, I., Grillner, L.: Diagnosis ofChlamydia trachomatis with culture and a direct test. Hygiea 1984, 93: 141.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Uyeda, C. T., Welborn, P., Ellison-Birang, N., Shunk, K., Tsaouse, B.: Rapid diagnosis of chlamydial infections with the MicroTrak Direct Test. Journal of Clinical Microbiology 1984, 20: 948–950.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ripa, K. T.: Microbiological diagnosis ofChlamydia trachomatis infection. Infection 1982, 10, Supplement 1: S19-S23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Weström, L., Mårdh, P. A.: Chlamydial salpingitis. British Medical Bulletin 1983, 39: 144–150.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schachter, J., Grossman, M., Holt, J., Sweet, R., Goodner, E., Mills, J.: Prospective study of chlamydial infection in neonates. Lancet 1979, ii: 377–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grillner, L., Beckman, S. & Hammar, H. Comparison of two enzyme immunoassays and an immunofluorescence test for detection ofChlamydia trachomatis . Eur. J, Clin. Microbiol. 5, 559–562 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017705

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017705

Keywords

Navigation