Multicenter comparative evaluation of two rapid immunoassay methods for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen in endocervical specimens

To evaluate two rapid immunoassay methods, QuickVue-Chlamydia (Quidel Corp., San Diego California) and Kodak SureCell (Kodak Corp., Rochester, NY) for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen in endocervical swabs from high- and low-risk females. Seven hundred and twenty-four females attending...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Clinical microbiology and infection 1997-12, Vol.3 (6), p.663-667
Hauptverfasser: Steingrímsson, Ólafur, Pawlak, Catherine, Van Der Pol, Barbara, Turner, Buffy P., Ólafsson, Jó Hjaltalín, Dolphin, Lauren, Williams, James E., Peyton, Cynthia E., Klepper, Robert E., Jones, Robert B., Anderson, Garland D., Rashti, Neda, Weissfeld, Alice S., Pronovost, Allan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To evaluate two rapid immunoassay methods, QuickVue-Chlamydia (Quidel Corp., San Diego California) and Kodak SureCell (Kodak Corp., Rochester, NY) for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen in endocervical swabs from high- and low-risk females. Seven hundred and twenty-four females attending three clinics were enrolled in the study. The results were compared to McCoy's or BGMK cell culture and discrepancies resolved with polymerase chain reaction and direct fluorescent antibody tests performed on left-over culture specimens. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of a positive and predictive value of a negative of the QuickVue Chlamydia assay were 92.0%, 99.1%, 92.0% and 99.1%, respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of a positive and predictive value of a negative of the SureCell assay were 90.0%, 99.8%, 98.6% and 98.8%, respectively. The performances of the two immunoassay methods were similar, and slight differences in sensitivity and specificity were not statistically significant. Both immunoassay methods performed well in high- and low-risk patient groups, both for symptomatic and for asymptomatic patients.
ISSN:1198-743X
1469-0691
DOI:10.1111/j.1469-0691.1997.tb00475.x