[Screening of Chlamydia trachomatis: is the diagnostic efficacy good enough?].
OBJECTIVE
In the background of discrepant results of C. trachomatis testing in women with suspected genital infections, three different tests have been compared.


METHODS
594 endocervical swabs were collected from women visiting the family planning clinic in Aarau. Each of the following tests was evaluated: Cobas Amplicor Chlamydia trachomatis, IF Chlamyset, and Chlamydia IF direct. If one of these three tests was positive, the fixed material on the slides was scraped off, and a PCR was performed.


RESULTS
15 out of 594 samples were "true'-positive. PCR recognized 14 of them, the IF Chlamyset 13, and the Chlamydia IF 8. With the IF Chlamyset 37 samples were false-positive.


CONCLUSIONS
PCR testing exhibits a good sensitivity and a high specificity, but we think that the sensitivity can be increased by improving the sample preparation step. The Chlamydia IF direct has a good specificity, but a rather low sensitivity. It should be noted that the PCR has the potential to become a new gold standard for the detection of C. trachomatis.
Niederhauser
C
C
Mikrobiologisches Institut, Bern, Schweiz. Christoph.Niederhauser@zlb.com
Honegger
C
C
Kaempf
L
L
D002690:Chlamydia Infections / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000635:transmission; D002692:Chlamydia trachomatis; D005260:Female; D019085:Fluorescent Antibody Technique, Direct; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D018445:Infectious Disease Transmission, Vertical / Q000517:prevention & control; D008403:Mass Screening; D016133:Polymerase Chain Reaction; D011237:Predictive Value of Tests; D011247:Pregnancy; D011251:Pregnancy Complications, Infectious / Q000175:diagnosis*; D015231:Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Bacterial / Q000175:diagnosis*