Suppr超能文献

宫颈内细胞回收及沙眼衣原体衣原体酶检测中细胞刷与拭子的比较。

Comparison of cytobrushes with swabs for recovery of endocervical cells and for Chlamydiazyme detection of Chlamydia trachomatis.

作者信息

Kellogg J A, Seiple J W, Klinedinst J L, Levisky J S

机构信息

Immunology Laboratory, York Hospital, Pennsylvania 17405.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1992 Nov;30(11):2988-90. doi: 10.1128/jcm.30.11.2988-2990.1992.

Abstract

Endocervical swab and cytobrush specimens from 1,301 symptomatic women were microscopically analyzed for adequacy and tested using Chlamydiazyme (CZ) (Abbott Laboratories). When the swab specimen was collected first, blocking antibody-confirmed CZ-positive results were obtained from 48 (8.0%) of 599 patients, 42 (87.5%) from swabs and 46 (95.8%) from cytobrushes (not significant). When the swab specimen was collected second, confirmed CZ-positive results were obtained from 46 (6.6%) of 702 patients, 44 (95.6%) from swabs and 41 (89.1%) from cytobrushes (not significant). Cytobrushes offered no significant advantage over swabs for CZ detection of Chlamydia trachomatis.

摘要

对1301名有症状女性的宫颈管拭子和细胞刷标本进行显微镜检查以评估样本是否合格,并使用衣原体酶免疫分析试剂(CZ)(雅培实验室)进行检测。当首先采集拭子标本时,在599例患者中,有48例(8.0%)经阻断抗体确认CZ检测结果为阳性,其中42例(87.5%)来自拭子,46例(95.8%)来自细胞刷(差异无统计学意义)。当第二个采集拭子标本时,在702例患者中,有46例(6.6%)经确认CZ检测结果为阳性,其中44例(95.6%)来自拭子,41例(89.1%)来自细胞刷(差异无统计学意义)。在使用CZ检测沙眼衣原体时,细胞刷相比拭子并无显著优势。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

1
The Chlamydia epidemic.衣原体流行病。
JAMA. 1981 May 1;245(17):1718-23.
2
Chlamydial infections.衣原体感染
Annu Rev Med. 1981;32:45-61. doi: 10.1146/annurev.me.32.020181.000401.

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