Bäckman M, Rudén A K, Ringertz O, Sandström E G
Department of Microbiology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden.
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1993 Jun;12(6):447-9. doi: 10.1007/BF01967439.
The performance of a commercial EIA (Chlamydiazyme) for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in urine specimens was compared with that of culture of urethral samples from men with urethritis. The incidence of chlamydial infection on the basis of culture results was 34% (56/167). The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values for the EIA were 55% (31/56), 98% (109/111), 94% (31/33) and 81% (109/134), respectively, compared with culture. Although this EIA has a high specificity, the low sensitivity makes it valueless as a clinical tool for demonstrating chlamydial antigen in urine from men with urethritis.
将一种用于检测尿标本中沙眼衣原体的商用酶免疫分析(Chlamydiazyme)的性能与来自尿道炎男性尿道样本培养法的性能进行了比较。基于培养结果的衣原体感染发生率为34%(56/167)。与培养法相比,该酶免疫分析的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为55%(31/56)、98%(109/111)、94%(31/33)和81%(109/134)。尽管这种酶免疫分析具有高特异性,但低敏感性使其作为一种用于检测尿道炎男性尿液中衣原体抗原的临床工具毫无价值。