4.7 Article

Impact of patient characteristics on performance of nucleic acid amplification tests and DNA probe for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in women with genital infections

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 43, Issue 2, Pages 577-584

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.43.2.577-584.2005

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The performance of nucleic acid amplified tests (NAAT) for Chlamydia trachomatis at the cervix and in urine was examined in 3,551 women, and the impacts of clinical findings (age, endocervical and urethral inflammation, menses, and gonococcal coinfection) were assessed. Ligase chain reaction (LCR) and first-generation uniplex PCR were studied relative to an unamplified DNA probe (PACE2) and to an expanded, independent diagnostic reference standard. Relative to the expanded standard, cervical or urine LCR was generally the most sensitive test in most subgroups. Increased detection by NAAT of cervical C. trachomatis over PACE2 was highest among women without mucopurulent endocervical discharge versus those with (relative increase in positivity with cervical LCR, 46%) and among women greater than or equal to20 years old versus younger women (relative increase in positivity with cervical LCR, 45%). The sensitivity of cervical PCR was highest when mucopurullent endocervical discharge was present (84%) and highest for cervical LCR when cervical gonococcal coinfection was detected (91%). Urethral inflammation was associated with higher sensitivities of urine LCR (86 compared to 70% when inflammation was absent) and PCR (82 compared to 62% when inflammation was absent). Menses had no effect on test performance. The effects of patient characteristics on test specificities were less pronounced and were closely related to observed sensitivities. These findings support expanded use of NAAT for screening and diagnosis of C. trachomatis in diverse clinical populations of women.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available