1985
DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(85)92467-5
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Interference of Staphylococcus Aureus in the Detection of Chlamydia Trachomatis by Monoclonal Antibodies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0
1

Year Published

1986
1986
2000
2000

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
0
8
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As a preliminary investigation of possible cross-reactivity of the commercial monoclonal antibody with oral microbes, the reagents were tested with microbes common to periodontitis and microbes reported in the literature to possibly cross-react with the DFA products ( Figure 1) [15,41,57,64]. The microbes were obtained from laboratories at the University of Michigan Schools of Dentistry and Public Health, and the Pathology Laboratory of the University of Michigan Hospital.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a preliminary investigation of possible cross-reactivity of the commercial monoclonal antibody with oral microbes, the reagents were tested with microbes common to periodontitis and microbes reported in the literature to possibly cross-react with the DFA products ( Figure 1) [15,41,57,64]. The microbes were obtained from laboratories at the University of Michigan Schools of Dentistry and Public Health, and the Pathology Laboratory of the University of Michigan Hospital.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Disadvantages include the need of a fluorescent microscope and a trained microscopist to differentiate artifact from positive fluorescence. The monoclonal antibody reagent binds nonspecifically to staphylococcal Protein A making it possible to misinterpret some strains of Staphylococcus aureus as Chlamydia [9].…”
Section: Immunofluorescencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, in the DIF test, nonspecific binding of Fc receptor-bearing protein to labelled antibody may render some staphylococcal species fluorescent [39]. Furthermore, the presence of fluorescing artefactual bodies [40], which are seen most commonly in rectal specimens, may also give rise to false-positive results, particularly in inexperienced hands.…”
Section: Choice Of Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%