Performance of five serological chlamydia antibody tests in subfertile women

Land, J. A.

doi:10.1093/humrep/deg479

Cited by 75 publications

(74 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus far, few studies have compared these new serological assays with the MIF assay. The findings of our study are consistent with previous studies that revealed good sensitivities and specificities of ELISA assays based on peptides from the major outer membrane protein (MOMP) [15,17]. Paukku et al [18] compared the MIF assay to the ELISA Ani Labsystems for 78 patients with tubal factor infertility and showed a good correlation between the results of these assays.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…It has been shown that CAT is more accurate in predicting distal tubal pathology, instead of unspecified tuboperitoneal abnormalities or proximal tubal occlusion [11]. Moreover, in studying the implications of different cutoff titres for a positive test, it has been noted that increasing the cutoff titre will improve the specificity, at the expense of sensitivity [7,12,15]. In patients with laparoscopically detected tubal pathology but negative antibody titres, diminished antibody titres related to time has been considered by some authors but not by others [26,27].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, MIF is not ideal for routine serodiagnostics because it is labour intensive, highly observer dependent, and interlaboratory variation is significant [13]. Enzyme immunoassays (EIA) based on synthetic peptides characterized by high throughput, objective endpoints, and technical accessibility are commercially available [14], but are generally considered to be inferior to MIF in predicting tubal factor subfertility [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparison of four serological assays for the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis in subfertile women

Muvunyi

Claeys

Sutter

et al. 2011

J Infect Dev Ctries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Chlamydia antibody testing (CAT) in serum has been introduced as a screening method in the infertility workup. We evaluated the test characteristics of two ELISA tests compared to micro-immunofluorescence tests (MIFs). MIFs are considered the gold standard in the C. trachomatis IgG antibodies detection. We also compared the accuracy of all CAT tests in predicting tubal subfertility, using laparoscopy as a reference. Methodology: Four commercial serological methods were used to analyse 101 serum samples for the presence of C. trachomatis IgG antibodies from patients at the Infertility Clinic of Ghent University Hospital. The diagnostic utility for prediction of tubal infertility of serological methods was evaluated based on patients' medical records. Results: A comparison of the serological assays showed little difference in the major performance characteristics: the sensitivities of all MIFs and ELISAs were 100% for all assays (except the ELISA Vircell, with a sensitivity of 90%), and the specificities ranged from 92% for MIF Ani Labsystems to 98% for the MIF Focus and ELISA Vircell. As compared to laparoscopy data, CAT positivity in subfertile women with tubal damage (n=40) did not significantly differ from that of subfertile women without tubal damage (n=61): Positive predictive values (PPV) of CAT ranged from 53% to 60% and negative predictive values (NPV) ranged from 62% to 64%. Conclusion: evaluated ELISAs are comparable to MIFs in the detection of C. trachomatis IgG antibodies and should be preferred for large serological studies, especially in resource poor settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of four serological assays for the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis in subfertile women

Muvunyi

Claeys

Sutter

et al. 2011

J Infect Dev Ctries

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, none of the chlamydial serological results were significantly associated with tubal infertility in the validation infertility clinic group (group 4). This result was inconsistent with most published studies, where chlamydial serology is typically significantly associated with tubal infertility (Akande et al, 2003;Mehanna et al, 1995;Claman et al, 1997;Land et al, 2003). However, it is possible that this is because the study included women with unknown tubal status in the comparison group, who would often be excluded in studies like this one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Development and evaluation of a multi-antigen peptide ELISA for the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis-related infertility in women

Menon

Stansfield

Logan

et al. 2016

Journal of Medical Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chlamydia trachomatis results in tubal factor infertility in some women. Diagnosis of this tubal infertility is difficult and typically involves laparoscopy or hysterosalpingography to detect the tubal blockages. Numerous serological tests have been developed; however, they are presently not used for diagnosis without subsequent surgical investigation during the infertility investigation. This study aimed to develop a highly specific serological assay for chlamydial tubal factor infertility in women that could be used to recommend direct progression to in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment for women who are positive. Women were recruited from a variety of settings including women seeking fertility treatment, sexual health and general practitioner (GP) consultations or antenatal care (n=259). The serological assay was developed using sera from a large group of women by using infertile microimmunofluorescence (MIF)-positive women with tubal damage as the positives compared to infertile or acute infection and/or fertile controls (negatives). The new multi-peptide ELISA was highly specific for the detection of tubal factor infertility (P=0.011) compared to another ELISA (P=0.022) and MIF (P=0.099). The sensitivity of the assay should be improved before clinical utility. Potentially, a two-step testing protocol could be used during the initial infertility investigation, where MIF followed by a highly specific ELISA could be used to recommend direct progression to IVF for women who are positive.

show abstract

“…In our study sensitivity for IgG Chlamydia trachomatis in adhesion and tubal obstruction was lower than in other studies. Land et al,( 2003) reports a Ig G antibodies for Chlamydia trachomatis sensitivity of about 60% for tubal pathology with a 85-90%specificity.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%