Suppr超能文献

三种检测无症状女性宫颈标本中沙眼衣原体方法的比较。

Comparison of three techniques for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical specimens from asymptomatic women.

作者信息

Lefebvre J, Laperrière H, Rousseau H, Massé R

机构信息

Laboratoire de santé publique de Québec, Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue, Canada.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Apr;26(4):726-31. doi: 10.1128/jcm.26.4.726-731.1988.

Abstract

Culture in DEAE-dextran-treated HeLa 229 cells, a solid-phase enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (Chlamydiazyme; Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, Ill.), and a direct immunofluorescence test (DFA) (MicroTrak; Syva Co., Palo Alto, Calif.) were compared for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in endocervical specimens from 715 asymptomatic women. Response to antibiotic therapy was also monitored at least 4 weeks after completion of therapy. An additional sample was collected at a control visit, and a second culture was performed if discrepancies were observed between the three tests. A total of 48 infections were diagnosed, for a prevalence of 6.7%. At the first visit, 37 specimens were positive by culture. The respective sensitivities of EIA and DFA were 78.4 and 81.1% and the respective specificities were 96.8 and 97.9% when compared with the cell culture technique. The positive predictive values were 56.9 and 68.2%, respectively. When the additional 11 infections detected by the second culture were included to establish a new standard of positivity, the sensitivity of the first culture was estimated at 77.1%. The positive predictive values of EIA and DFA increased to 77.6 and 83.7%, respectively. EIA and DFA performed as well as culture for control of therapy; a 100% agreement among the three techniques was observed.

摘要

比较了用二乙氨基乙基葡聚糖(DEAE - 葡聚糖)处理的HeLa 229细胞培养法、固相酶免疫测定法(EIA)(衣原体酶免疫测定法;雅培实验室,伊利诺伊州北芝加哥)和直接免疫荧光试验(DFA)(MicroTrak;赛瓦公司,加利福尼亚州帕洛阿尔托)对715名无症状女性宫颈标本中沙眼衣原体的检测情况。在治疗完成后至少4周还监测了对抗生素治疗的反应。在对照访视时采集了额外的样本,如果在三项检测之间观察到差异,则进行第二次培养。总共诊断出48例感染,患病率为6.7%。在首次访视时,37份标本培养呈阳性。与细胞培养技术相比,EIA和DFA的敏感性分别为78.4%和81.1%,特异性分别为96.8%和97.9%。阳性预测值分别为56.9%和68.2%。当纳入第二次培养检测到的另外11例感染以建立新的阳性标准时,首次培养的敏感性估计为77.1%。EIA和DFA的阳性预测值分别增至77.6%和83.7%。在治疗监测方面,EIA和DFA与培养法效果相当;观察到三项技术之间的一致性为100%。

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