Blanding J, Hirsch L, Stranton N, Wright T, Aarnaes S, de la Maza L, Peterson E M
Department of Pathology, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange 92668.
J Clin Microbiol. 1993 Jun;31(6):1622-5. doi: 10.1128/jcm.31.6.1622-1625.1993.
The Clearview Chlamydia assay (Wampole Laboratories, Cranbury, N.J.), the PACE 2 DNA probe assay (GenProbe, San Diego, Calif.), and culture were compared for their abilities to detect Chlamydia trachomatis from cervical specimens in a population with a low prevalence (3.9%) of chlamydial infections. A consensus reference method was used. The consensus reference method defined a positive specimen as one with a positive culture result or positive by both of the two nonculture methods. Of the 940 specimens tested, 37 were positive; 36 were positive by culture, 28 were positive by the PACE 2 assay, and 27 were positive by the Clearview assay, giving sensitivities of 97.3, 75.5, and 72.9%, respectively, and specificities of 100, 97.1, and 98.9%, respectively. There was a direct correlation between the number of inclusion-forming units detected by culture and the ability of the two nonculture methods to detect the positive specimens.
对Clearview衣原体检测法(新泽西州克兰伯里的Wampole实验室)、PACE 2 DNA探针检测法(加利福尼亚州圣地亚哥的GenProbe公司)以及培养法检测衣原体感染低流行率(3.9%)人群宫颈标本中沙眼衣原体的能力进行了比较。采用了一种共识参考方法。该共识参考方法将阳性标本定义为培养结果阳性或两种非培养方法均为阳性的标本。在检测的940份标本中,37份为阳性;36份培养阳性,28份PACE 2检测法阳性,27份Clearview检测法阳性,灵敏度分别为97.3%、75.5%和72.9%,特异性分别为100%、97.1%和98.9%。培养法检测到的包涵体形成单位数量与两种非培养方法检测阳性标本的能力之间存在直接相关性。