Comparision between Polymerase Chain Reaction and QuickVue(TM) EIA method in Diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis Infection.
- Author:
Chang Hoon LEE
1
;
So Joung KIM
;
Byoung Il YUN
Author Information
1. Department of Laboratory Medicine, Konkuk University College of Medicine, Chungju, Korea. chlee@kku.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
PCR;
QuickVue(TM) EIA;
Chlamydia trachomatis
- MeSH:
Abscess;
Chlamydia trachomatis*;
Chlamydia*;
Diagnosis*;
Diagnostic Tests, Routine;
Female;
Pelvic Inflammatory Disease;
Plasmids;
Polymerase Chain Reaction*;
Uterine Cervicitis
- From:Journal of Laboratory Medicine and Quality Assurance
2004;26(1):211-214
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Chlamydia trachomatis is one of the most common causative agents of the sexual transmitted diseases, and the accurate diagnosis and early treatment are very important to prevent the transmission. So, we evaluated the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and QuickVue(TM) (Quidel Corp. San Diego, CA) EIA method as a routine clinical laboratory test. METHODS: The 80 cervical swab samples including pelvic inflammatory disease, cervicitis and tube-ovarian abscess were tested using PCR with plasmid specific primers T1, T2 and commercially available QuickVue(TM) EIA kit. RESULTS: The positivities of the PCR and QuickVue(TM) EIA test were 17.5% (14/80 samples) and 12.5% (10/80 samples), respectively. There were 95% (76/80 samples) of positive or negative result concordance rates and 5% (4/80 samples) of disconcordance between the two methods, in which showed PCR positive and EIA negative results. CONCLUSIONS: We assume that PCR and QuickVue(TM) method are highly confident as a routine clinical laboratory diagnostic test for C. trachomatis infection. But more careful interpretation of QuickVue(TM) EIA and the additional study for variable samples will be needed.
