Skulnick M, Small G W, Simor A E, Low D E, Khosid H, Fraser S, Chua R
Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
J Clin Microbiol. 1991 Sep;29(9):2086-8. doi: 10.1128/jcm.29.9.2086-2088.1991.
Two antigen detection systems, Clearview Chlamydia (Unipath Ltd., Bedford, United Kingdom) and Chlamydiazyme (Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, Ill.), were compared with culture for the diagnosis of chlamydia infection in women attending gynecological clinics. Chlamydia trachomatis was isolated from 43 (4.5%) of the 965 women tested. In comparison with tissue culture, the Clearview Chlamydia and Chlamydiazyme tests had sensitivities of 79.0 and 74.4%, respectively, and both had a specificity of 99.6%. The results show that the Clearview Chlamydia test is comparable to Chlamydiazyme for the detection of C. trachomatis from endocervical specimens in a population with a low prevalence of infection.
比较了两种抗原检测系统Clearview衣原体检测试剂盒(英国贝德福德Unipath有限公司)和衣原体酶免疫检测试剂盒(美国伊利诺伊州北芝加哥雅培实验室)与培养法在诊断妇科门诊就诊女性衣原体感染中的应用。在接受检测的965名女性中,有43名(4.5%)分离出沙眼衣原体。与组织培养相比,Clearview衣原体检测试剂盒和衣原体酶免疫检测试剂盒的敏感性分别为79.0%和74.4%,两者的特异性均为99.6%。结果表明,在感染率较低的人群中,从宫颈标本中检测沙眼衣原体时,Clearview衣原体检测试剂盒与衣原体酶免疫检测试剂盒相当。