Rouhan D, Le Noc P
Ann Biol Clin (Paris). 1987;45(2):160-4.
Two immunologic technics of Chlamydia trachomatis detection: IF (Microtrack Syva-Bio-Merieux) and ELISA (Chlamydiazyme Abbott) are compared with cell cultures revealed by giemsa on 177 and 210 samples respectively. Sensibility, specificity, agreement among methods and predictive values are given for each nature of prelevement. The direct fluorescent antibody test is globaly more sensitive (94.7%) than Chlamydiazyme (78.9%), but less specific (96% against 100%). Two major inconveniences of IF are not recovered with Chlamydiazyme (extreme fastidiousness and subjective reading). The discordances between the three methods are discussed, as well as their respectives advantages and inconveniences.
免疫荧光法（Microtrack Syva - Bio - Merieux）和酶联免疫吸附测定法（Chlamydiazyme Abbott）分别与吉姆萨染色显示的细胞培养法进行比较，样本数分别为177例和210例。针对每种采集样本的类型给出了敏感性、特异性、方法间的一致性和预测值。直接荧光抗体试验总体上比衣原体酶联免疫吸附测定法（78.9%）更敏感（94.7%），但特异性较低（分别为96%和100%）。免疫荧光法的两个主要不便之处在衣原体酶联免疫吸附测定法中不存在（极端苛求性和主观读数）。讨论了三种方法之间的不一致性，以及它们各自的优缺点。
