title: [Comparative analysis of methods of diagnosis of chlamydia infection].
abstract: In case of a correct sampling, the diagnostic value of optic and electron microscopy for detecting Chlamydia infection is not inferior to that of direct microimmunofluorescence (DMIF) and higher than that of enzyme immunoassay (EIA). Optic microscopy showed that basal vaginal epithelium and buccal mucosa can be infected with Chlamydia. Provazek bodies were detected in the buccal mucosa of the overwhelming majority of patients with genital chlamydiasis. These results were confirmed by DMIF and EIA. Since none of the diagnostic methods is 100% reliable, we recommend using two methods: inexpensive optic microscopy and polymerase chain reaction or DMIF.
authors.forename: L P
authors.initials: LP
authors.lastname: Zakharenko
authors.forename: E I
authors.initials: EI
authors.lastname: Riabchikova
authors.forename: N N
authors.initials: NN
authors.lastname: Kolodina
authors.forename: N A
authors.initials: NA
authors.lastname: Voronova
authors.forename: T I
authors.initials: TI
authors.lastname: Nepomniashchaia
authors.forename: N G
authors.initials: NG
authors.lastname: Zhevachevskiĭ
authors.forename: V A
authors.initials: VA
authors.lastname: Naumov
authors.forename: E Iu
authors.initials: EIu
authors.lastname: Dernova
mesh_terms: D002689:Chlamydia / Q000166:cytology; D002690:Chlamydia Infections / Q000175:diagnosis*; D005260:Female; D019085:Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Direct; D006801:Humans