Comparison of Serological Assays for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis Antibodies in Different Groups of Obstetrical and Gynecological Patients-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

Comparison of Serological Assays for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis Antibodies in Different Groups of Obstetrical and Gynecological Patients

Published:2003-01 Issue:1 Volume:10 Page:174-176
ISSN:1556-6811
Container-title:Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
language:en
Short-container-title:Clin Vaccine Immunol

Author:

Bax C. J.¹²,Mutsaers J. A. E. M.³,Jansen C. L.³,Trimbos J. B.²,Dörr P. J.¹,Oostvogel P. M.³

Affiliation:

1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology

2. Department of Gynecology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands

3. Department of Medical Microbiology, MCH Westeinde Hospital, The Hague

Abstract

ABSTRACT New serological enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) were compared with microimmunofluorescence (MIF) as a “gold standard” to detect Chlamydia trachomatis antibodies in different groups of obstetrical, gynecological, and subfertile patients. There were no significant differences in seroprevalence rates, except for the group of C. trachomatis -positive patients ( P < 0.01). Test characteristics were calculated for Chlamydia-EIA (Biologische Analysensystem GmbH, Lich, Germany) and pELISA (Medac, Wedel, Germany). pELISA seems to be a good alternative to MIF. It has high specificity and is easier to perform.

Publisher

American Society for Microbiology

Subject

Microbiology (medical),Clinical Biochemistry,Immunology,Immunology and Allergy

Link

https://journals.asm.org/doi/pdf/10.1128/CDLI.10.1.174-176.2003

Reference12 articles.

1. Clad, A., H. Freidank, J. Plünnecke, B. Jung, and E. E. Petersen. 1994. Chlamydia trachomatis species-specific serology: ImmunoComb Chlamydia Bivalent versus microimmunofluorescence (MIF). Infection22:165-173.

2. Clad, A., H. M. Freidank, M. Kunze, U. Schnoeckel, S. Hofmeier, U. Flecken, and E. E. Petersen. 2000. Detection of seroconversion and persistence of Chlamydia trachomatis antibodies in five different serological tests. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis.19:932-937.

3. Gijsen, A. P., J. A. Land, V. J. Goossens, P. Leffers, C. A. Bruggeman, and J. L. H. Evers. 2001. Chlamydia pneumoniae and screening for tubal factor subfertility. Hum. Reprod.16:487-491.

4. Gijsen A. P. V. J. Goossens J. A. Land J. L. H. Evers and C. A. Bruggeman. 2000. The predictive value of chlamydia antibody testing (CAT) in screening for tubal factor subfertility: micro-immunofluorescence (MIF) versus ELISA p.101. In P. Saikku (ed.) Proceedings of the Fourth Meeting of the European Society for Chlamydia Research Helsinki Finland.

5. Johnson, N. P., K. Taylor, A. A. Nadgir, D. J. Chinn, and P. J. Taylor. 2000. Can diagnostic laparoscopy be avoided in routine investigation for infertility? Br. J. Obstet. Gynaecol.107:174-178.

Cited by 12 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis genital infections in the era of genomic medicine;Brazilian Journal of Microbiology;2021-06-23

2. Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in Pap Smear Samples from South Khorasan Province of Iran;INT J FERTIL STERIL;2018

3. Diagnosis of chlamydial infection;Medicinski casopis;2018

4. Impact of the Levonorgestrel-Releasing Intrauterine System on the Progression of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection to Pelvic Inflammatory Disease in a Baboon Model;The Journal of Infectious Diseases;2017-12-15

5. Comparison the diagnostic value of serological and molecular methods for screening and detecting Chlamydia trachomatis in semen of infertile men: A cross-sectional study;International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine;2017-12-01