Can serology diagnose upper genital tract Chlamydia trachomatis infections? Studies on women with pelvic pain, with or without chlamydial plasmid DNA in endometrial biopsy tissue.

BACKGROUND

Upper genital tract chlamydial infections in women are on the increase, and serology might be a convenient tool for diagnosis. Evaluations of this approach are needed in women with or without microbiologic evidence of organisms in the upper genital tract.

GOALS

To compare the results of antibody assays with cervical culture and upper genital tract histopathology in women with pelvic pain and chlamydial plasmid DNA in endometrial biopsies.

STUDY DESIGN

Chlamydia trachomatis plasmid DNA was detected by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on extracted deparaffinized endometrial biopsy tissue. Five antichlamydial antibody assays were performed measuring total antibodies or immunoglobulin G (IgG), IgM, and IgA classes on sera from 14 women with plasmid DNA as well as 31 without plasmid DNA.

RESULTS

Accepting the presence of plasmid DNA as the gold standard, no single test had total diagnostic accuracy. The best sensitivity and specificity occurred with the following assays: whole inclusion fluorescence (WIF) (100% and 80.6%); microimmunofluorescence IgM (MIF IgM) (78.6% and 93.6%); and heatshock protein-60 enzyme immunoassay (42.9% and 100%). Although recombinant anti-lipopolysaccharide enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays measured anti-chlamydial antibodies in a large proportion of these women, specificity was low. The sensitivity and specificity of cervical culture was 28.6% and 100% and of endometrial histopathology was 71.4% and 48.4%. Analysis of patient serological profiles suggested that and 6 women without plasmid DNA may have been cases that were missed by PCR.

CONCLUSIONS

Evaluations of assays to diagnosis Chlamydia trachomatis upper genital tract infections could use the presence of organisms or their markers in the upper genital tract as a standard of comparison. Some of these serological assays, such as WIF or MIF IgM, may be helpful in diagnosis, but more studies are needed.