» Articles » PMID: 8567894

Use of PCR and Direct Immunofluorescence Microscopy for Confirmation of Results Obtained by Syva MicroTrak Chlamydia Enzyme Immunoassay

Overview
Specialty Microbiology
Date 1995 Oct 1
PMID 8567894
Citations 6
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

A procedure for use of the Amplicor Chlamydia PCR with the Syva MicroTrak enzyme immunoassay (EIA) medium was developed, and the performance of the Syva MicroTrak EIA was evaluated by use of PCR and the Syva MicroTrak direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA) as confirmatory methods. PCR detected Chlamydia organisms at a 10-fold greater dilution than did DFA. Of 366 specimens, 119 specimens were positive by both PCR and DFA, 6 specimens were positive only by PCR, and 241 specimens were negative by both PCR and DFA. Subsequently, DFA and the developed PCR procedure were used prospectively for confirmation of EIA results in a defined negative gray zone between the cutoff value and 30% of the cutoff value (70% below the cutoff value). All specimens with results above the EIA cutoff value were also subjected to confirmation with DFA and PCR. EIA was performed on 7,748 endocervical swab specimens, of which 494 (6.4%) were subjected to confirmation, and on 968 male urethral swab specimens, of which 185 (19.1%) were subjected to confirmation. A "gold standard" was based on the findings by DFA and PCR, and divergent results were resolved by a major outer membrane protein-based PCR. Forty-five of 160 female specimens (28.1%) and 11 of 93 male specimens (11.8%) within the defined negative gray zone were found to be positive. Of 334 female specimens having absorbance unit (AU) values above the EIA cutoff value, 258 could be confirmed, thereby giving a positive predictive value of 77% (258/334). Accordingly, the positive predictive value with male specimens was 95% (87/92). The prevalence of Chlamydia trachomatis-positive specimens was 3.9% (303/7,748) in females and 10.1% (98/968) in males. All male specimens having AU values above 1.0 in the EIA were confirmed positive. In contrast to this, 16 females with AU values above 1.0 in the EIA could not be confirmed positive with either DFA or PCR. The mean age of these females was higher than that of patients testing negative for C. trachomatis (P < 0.005). This might suggest an age-dependent change in vaginal colonization with an organism(s) crossreacting in the EIA. Thus, the PCR procedure developed can be used for confirmation of EIA results, testing specimens with AU values in the defined negative gray zone improves the sensitivity of EIA, and all specimens testing positive in EIA should be subjected to confirmation.

Citing Articles

Recurrence of urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis infection evaluated by mailed samples obtained at home: 24 weeks' prospective follow up study.

Kjaer H, Dimcevski G, Hoff G, Olesen F, Ostergaard L Sex Transm Infect. 2000; 76(3):169-72.

PMID: 10961191 PMC: 1744142. DOI: 10.1136/sti.76.3.169.


Head-to-head evaluation of five chlamydia tests relative to a quality-assured culture standard.

Newhall W, Johnson R, Delisle S, Fine D, Hadgu A, Matsuda B J Clin Microbiol. 1999; 37(3):681-5.

PMID: 9986831 PMC: 84517. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.37.3.681-685.1999.


Efficacy of home sampling for screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: randomised study.

Ostergaard L, Andersen B, Olesen F, Moller J BMJ. 1998; 317(7150):26-7.

PMID: 9651263 PMC: 28598. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.317.7150.26.


Comparison of performance and cost-effectiveness of direct fluorescent-antibody, ligase chain reaction, and PCR assays for verification of chlamydial enzyme immunoassay results for populations with a low to moderate prevalence of Chlamydia....

Dean D, Ferrero D, McCarthy M J Clin Microbiol. 1998; 36(1):94-9.

PMID: 9431928 PMC: 124815. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.36.1.94-99.1998.


Lowering the cut off value of an automated chlamydia enzyme immunoassay and confirmation by PCR and direct immunofluorescent antibody test.

Tong C, Donnelly C, Hood N J Clin Pathol. 1997; 50(8):681-5.

PMID: 9301554 PMC: 500120. DOI: 10.1136/jcp.50.8.681.


References
1.
Palmer L, Falkow S . A common plasmid of Chlamydia trachomatis. Plasmid. 1986; 16(1):52-62. DOI: 10.1016/0147-619x(86)90079-x. View

2.
Ostergaard L . Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in a low prevalence population. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 1995; 14(5):471-2. DOI: 10.1007/BF02114911. View

3.
Peterson E, Markoff B, Schachter J, de la Maza L . The 7.5-kb plasmid present in Chlamydia trachomatis is not essential for the growth of this microorganism. Plasmid. 1990; 23(2):144-8. DOI: 10.1016/0147-619x(90)90033-9. View

4.
Ostergaard L, Birkelund S, Christiansen G . Use of polymerase chain reaction for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis. J Clin Microbiol. 1990; 28(6):1254-60. PMC: 267914. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.28.6.1254-1260.1990. View

5.
Zeeberg B, Thelin I, Schalen C . Chlamydia trachomatis antigen detection by Chlamydiazyme combined with Chlamydia Blocking Reagent verification. Int J STD AIDS. 1992; 3(5):355-9. DOI: 10.1177/095646249200300510. View