1995
DOI: 10.1159/000292424
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Positive Serology for Chlamydia: Is It Always forChlamydia trachomatis?

Abstract: In this study we tried to determine the factual prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis seropositive women. Sera of 174 sexually active women of reproductive age who attended the emergency room in our gynecology department were tested by both a species-specific solid-phase enzyme immunoassay (SPEIA, ImmunoComb, Orgenics, Israel) and by an immunoperoxidase assay (IPA). One-hundred and twenty-two of 174 women (70.1%) tested were found positive for C trachomatis by the IPA test. The SPEIA test identified 41 (33.6%) o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…That is, among the sexually transmitted infections, Chlamydia trachomatis shows sharp geographical differences, but it occurs with a considerable frequency and should be screened more routinely in daily clinical practice. Therefore, although it is known that Chlamydia antibody tests have shown false positive and false negative results (17,18) and do not differentiate a current infection from immunological memory, Tosic-Pajic et al (18) consider the serological tests to be the most suitable screening method in terms of cost-effectiveness.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…That is, among the sexually transmitted infections, Chlamydia trachomatis shows sharp geographical differences, but it occurs with a considerable frequency and should be screened more routinely in daily clinical practice. Therefore, although it is known that Chlamydia antibody tests have shown false positive and false negative results (17,18) and do not differentiate a current infection from immunological memory, Tosic-Pajic et al (18) consider the serological tests to be the most suitable screening method in terms of cost-effectiveness.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Ein Serum war IgG-positiv fur C. Der bis vor ca. einem Jahr verwendete Antikorpertest IPAzyme Chlamydia (Savyon Diagnostics Beer Sheva, Israel) erfaBt neben speziesspezifischen Anti-Chlamydien-Antikorpern (anti-MOMP) auch genusspezifische (anti-LPS) Antikorper and ist daher fur die Diagnostik einer Infektion mit C. trachomatis nur bedingt geeignet [8,12]. Die Rolle der LPS-Antigen fur die Kreuzreaktivitat der drei Chlamydienspezies im MIF-Test wurde von Domeika et al [4] an Seren von 39 Patienten mit sexuell erworbener reaktiver Arthritis (SARA) eindrucksvoll bewiesen.…”
Section: Antigennegative Patienten N = 111unclassified