Læknablaðið

Árgangur

Læknablaðið - 15.07.1995, Blaðsíða 31

Læknablaðið - 15.07.1995, Blaðsíða 31
LÆKNABLAÐIÐ 1995; 81 543 Table I. Performance of thefour rapid tests. Specimensfor the QuickVue test, the SureCell test and culture, were collected in an alternating sequence but the specimen for PCR was always collected last. QuickVue SureCell Culture PCR No positive positive positive positive Infected 45 43 43 43 41 Not infected 195 2 0 0 0 Total 240 45 43 43 41 Table II. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of a positive (PVP) and the predictive value of a negative (PVN) of the QuickVue test, the SureCell test and culture. Sensitivity % Specificity % PVP % PVN % QuickVue 96 99 96 99 SureCell 96 100 100 99 Culture 96 100 100 99 years of age with the median age of 19. Ninety eight patients had symptoms and 142 were asymptomatic. Of those 240 patients, 45 were considered to be infected, giving a prevalence of 18.8% in this population. The performance of the two different tests is shown in table I. The sensitivity, specificity, predictive value of a positive (PVP) and the predictive value of a negative (PVN) for the different assays is shown in table II. The calculation was not per- formed for PCR because of the bias caused by the specimen collection sequence. In the two instances where culture was false negative the three other tests and the comfirmatory tests were all in agreement. The majority of the culture positive patients had high inclusion counts. Only four had five or fewer inclusions per cover slip. The two false negative Quick- Vue tests were among those four as was one of the false negative SureCell tests. The other false negative SureCell test had a high inclu- sion count but the specinten was collected last in the collection sequence. Discussion Many new diagnostic tests have come avail- able for the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachoma- tis infections in recent years. None of them are perfect nor are any of them ideal for use in all situations. The traditional gold standard, cell culture, is time consuming and expensive and although it is highly specific it lacks in sensitiv- ity (11). Also, the specimens used for culture need to be transported rapidly to the laborato- ry and under controlled conditions (12). The antigen detection tests, which are in most widespread use at present, give more rapid results and are the least expensive methods for diagnosing these infections. Many of the anti- gen detection tests are intended for use in clin- ical laboratories but some, such as the two evaluated here, are intended for use in physi- cians offices. The antigen detection methods have traditionally been less sensitive than cell culture for the detection of these infections (8). The sensitivity is though, heavily depend- ent on the types of patients studied, the lack of sensitivity being most pronounced in asympto- matic males (4,8). All diagnostic tests perform best, in terms of sensitivity and predictive val- ue of a positive, in populations as the one studied in this evaluation, young high risk fe- males. The two tests, QuickVue and the Sure- Cell performed extremely well compared to culture in this study and the latter better than previously reported (10). The reason is without doubt the quality of the specimen and the rapid delivery to the laboratory. The amount of anti- gen in an infected cervical canal is related to age, decreasing with increased age of the pa- tient. Our patients were mostly young high risk females with high inclusion counts on culture. The new DNA amplification methods like PCR and LCR have been shown to be ntore sensitive than culture (11-16) and the inferior performance of PCR in this study is undoubt- edly caused by bias in the specimen collection sequence, the specimen for this test always being collected last. In conclusion it can be said that both of the
Blaðsíða 1
Blaðsíða 2
Blaðsíða 3
Blaðsíða 4
Blaðsíða 5
Blaðsíða 6
Blaðsíða 7
Blaðsíða 8
Blaðsíða 9
Blaðsíða 10
Blaðsíða 11
Blaðsíða 12
Blaðsíða 13
Blaðsíða 14
Blaðsíða 15
Blaðsíða 16
Blaðsíða 17
Blaðsíða 18
Blaðsíða 19
Blaðsíða 20
Blaðsíða 21
Blaðsíða 22
Blaðsíða 23
Blaðsíða 24
Blaðsíða 25
Blaðsíða 26
Blaðsíða 27
Blaðsíða 28
Blaðsíða 29
Blaðsíða 30
Blaðsíða 31
Blaðsíða 32
Blaðsíða 33
Blaðsíða 34
Blaðsíða 35
Blaðsíða 36
Blaðsíða 37
Blaðsíða 38
Blaðsíða 39
Blaðsíða 40
Blaðsíða 41
Blaðsíða 42
Blaðsíða 43
Blaðsíða 44
Blaðsíða 45
Blaðsíða 46
Blaðsíða 47
Blaðsíða 48
Blaðsíða 49
Blaðsíða 50
Blaðsíða 51
Blaðsíða 52
Blaðsíða 53
Blaðsíða 54
Blaðsíða 55
Blaðsíða 56
Blaðsíða 57
Blaðsíða 58
Blaðsíða 59
Blaðsíða 60
Blaðsíða 61
Blaðsíða 62
Blaðsíða 63
Blaðsíða 64
Blaðsíða 65
Blaðsíða 66
Blaðsíða 67
Blaðsíða 68
Blaðsíða 69
Blaðsíða 70
Blaðsíða 71
Blaðsíða 72

x

Læknablaðið

Beinir tenglar

Ef þú vilt tengja á þennan titil, vinsamlegast notaðu þessa tengla:

Tengja á þennan titil: Læknablaðið
https://timarit.is/publication/986

Tengja á þetta tölublað:

Tengja á þessa síðu:

Tengja á þessa grein:

Vinsamlegast ekki tengja beint á myndir eða PDF skjöl á Tímarit.is þar sem slíkar slóðir geta breyst án fyrirvara. Notið slóðirnar hér fyrir ofan til að tengja á vefinn.