Suppr超能文献

用于检测宫颈标本中沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌的Digene杂交捕获2法与传统培养法的比较。

Comparison of Digene hybrid capture 2 and conventional culture for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in cervical specimens.

作者信息

Darwin Ling H, Cullen Allison P, Arthur Patrick M, Long Carole D, Smith Kim R, Girdner Jennifer L, Hook Edward W, Quinn Thomas C, Lorincz Attila T

机构信息

Digene Corporation, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20878, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2002 Feb;40(2):641-4. doi: 10.1128/JCM.40.02.641-644.2002.

Abstract

Digene's Hybrid Capture 2 (HC2) CT/GC, CT-ID, and GC-ID DNA tests were evaluated by comparison to traditional culture methods for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections in 669 cervical specimens from high-risk female populations attending two sexually transmitted disease clinics. For detection of either or both infections, the HC2 CT/GC test algorithm had 93.8% sensitivity and 95.9% specificity compared to those of culture. After resolution of discrepant results by direct fluorescent-antibody (DFA) staining or PCR assay, the relative sensitivity and specificity of the HC2 CT/GC test algorithm increased to 94.8 and 99.8%, while the values for culture were 83.6% (McNemar's P value, 0.0062) and 100%, respectively. For detection of the individual pathogens, the relative sensitivities for the HC2 CT-ID and GC-ID tests were 97.2 and 92.2% and the specificities were greater than 99% compared to culture adjucated by DFA staining and PCR. Test performance varied at the two clinics: the HC2 CT/GC algorithm, CT-ID, and GC-ID tests had significantly higher sensitivities (McNemar's P value, <0.05) than that of culture for the population at one clinic as well as for the combined populations. At the other clinic, the HC2 tests performed as well as culture.

摘要

通过与传统培养方法进行比较,对迪基因公司的杂交捕获2代(HC2)CT/GC、CT-ID和GC-ID DNA检测方法进行了评估,以检测来自两家性传播疾病诊所的高危女性人群的669份宫颈标本中的沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌感染情况。对于检测一种或两种感染,与培养方法相比,HC2 CT/GC检测算法的灵敏度为93.8%,特异性为95.9%。通过直接荧光抗体(DFA)染色或聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测解决结果不一致的问题后,HC2 CT/GC检测算法的相对灵敏度和特异性分别提高到94.8%和99.8%,而培养方法的值分别为83.6%(麦克内马尔P值,0.0062)和100%。对于检测单个病原体,与经DFA染色和PCR校正的培养方法相比,HC2 CT-ID和GC-ID检测的相对灵敏度分别为97.2%和92.2%,特异性均大于99%。两家诊所的检测性能有所不同:对于其中一家诊所的人群以及合并后的人群,HC2 CT/GC算法、CT-ID和GC-ID检测的灵敏度显著高于培养方法(麦克内马尔P值,<0.05)。在另一家诊所,HC2检测的表现与培养方法相当。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验