Evaluation of two ELISA's for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis from endocervical swabs

Altaie, Sousan Sayahtaheri; Meier, Frederick A.; Centor, Robert M.; Wakabongo, Musau; Toksoz, Devrim; Harvey, Kevin; Basinger, Ellen; Johnson, Betty Anne; Brookman, Richard R.; Dalton, Harry P.

doi:10.1016/0732-8893(90)90034-s

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their specificity may be improved by confirmation of positives using direct immunofluorescence. Various comparisons of the different diagnostic techniques have been performed, 43–46 but the relative sensitivities and specificities quoted have to be interpreted in the light of the prevalence of chlamydial infection in the population studied and the methods of specimen collection employed 47 , 48…”

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Chlamydial Infections

Blanchard

Mabey

1994

Int J Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY Chlamydiae are among the most successful bacterial pathogens, and there are few branches of medicine on which chlamydial infection and its sequelae do not impinge. Chlamydia trachomatis is responsible for many million cases of blindness, pelvic inflammatory disease, urethritis, epididymitis, infertility and ectopic pregnancy annually; it also causes lymphogranuloma venereum, reactive arthritis, ophthalmia neonatorum and infantile pneumonia. C. pneumoniae is among the most common causes of community‐acquired pneumonia, and recent evidence suggests that it may play a part in the pathogenesis of coronary heart disease. C. psittaci is a highly prevalent zoonotic infection with a wide host range. It is of great economic importance, and causes sporadic but sometimes devastating disease in humans. Most chlamydial infections are subclinical, but even if the initial illness is mild there may be serious long‐term sequelae. It is therefore important to identify and treat chlamydial infections in their early stages, but diagnosis usually depends on laboratory tests. Recent trials have shown that single doses of the long‐acting macrolide azithromycin are effective in the treatment of genital and ocular C. trachomatis infection, but longer courses of antimicrobials remain the mainstay of treatment for C. pneumoniae and C. psittaci infections.

show abstract

Section: Diagnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Chlamydial Infections

Blanchard

Mabey

1994

Int J Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Wide arrays of validated immunoassays are currently available [65][66][67][68][69][70][71][72][73][74][75][76][77]. Direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) testing can be utilized directly on clinical samples.…”

Section: Antigen Detection Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection

Visser¹,

Hoosen²

2012

Chlamydia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Recent studies evaluating PCR (Amplicor) detection of C. trachomatis in urine from men and women by using culture with nonculture tests of urethral or endocervical specimens as a standard EIA has been shown in multiple direct-comparison studies to be superior to that of Chlamydiazyme(2,147,148).Several other EIAs for detection of C. trachomatis are commercially available, but they have not been as well evaluated as Chlamydiazyme and Microtrak. All employ an LPS-specific antibody and are thus subject to the same limitations.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections

Black

1997

Clin Microbiol Rev

426

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Infections caused by Chlamydia trachomatis are probably the most common sexually transmitted diseases in the United States. Commonly unrecognized and often inadequately treated, chlamydial infections can ascend the reproductive tract and cause pelvic inflammatory disease, which often results in the devastating consequences of infertility, ectopic pregnancy, or chronic pelvic pain. C. trachomatis infections are also known to increase the risk for human immunodeficiency virus infection. The obligate intracellular life cycle of C. trachomatis has traditionally required laboratory diagnostic tests that are technically demanding, labor-intensive, expensive, and difficult to access. In spite of these historical challenges, however, laboratory diagnosis of C. trachomatis has been a rapidly advancing area in which there is presently a wide array of commercial diagnostic technologies, costs, manufacturers. This review describes and compares the diagnostic methods for C. trachomatis infection that are currently approved for use in the United States, including the newest DNA amplification technologies which are yet to be licensed for commercial use. Issues to consider in selecting a test for purposes of screening versus diagnosis based on prevalence, performance, legal, social, and cost issues are also discussed.

show abstract

Evaluation of two ELISA's for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis from endocervical swabs

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

Chlamydial Infections

Chlamydial Infections

Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection

Current methods of laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About