Comparing Two Methods of Detection for Chlamydia trachomatis in Liquid-Based Papanicolaou Tests
Department of Pathology, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.American Journal of Clinical Pathology (Impact Factor: 2.51). 08/2012; 138(2):236-40. DOI: 10.1309/AJCP2B7XQTCNAMJP
This study compared the performance of Chlamydia trachomatis testing using 2 methods: the BD ProbeTec Chlamydia trachomatis Q(x) Amplified DNA Assay (CTQ) on the BD Viper System with XTR technology (CTQ assay) and the Hybrid Capture (HC) 2 assay. A total of 1,054 Surepath and ThinPrep specimens were tested for C trachomatis nucleic acids using the CTQ assay and the HC2 assay. For positive and discrepant C trachomatis test results, confirmatory test for C trachomatis was performed using a reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Of 1,054 liquid-based gynecologic cytology samples tested for C trachomatis using both assays, 1,041 tested negative on both. In 6 (0.57%) samples, findings were discordant. The CTQ assay and the HC2 assay had sensitivity rates of 100% and 66.7%, respectively, with comparable specificity (99.9%). The positive predictive values were 92.3% and 88.9% with the CTQ and HC2 assays, respectively. In this study, the CTQ assay was found to be more sensitive than the HC2 assay in detecting chlamydial infection; the CTQ assay also demonstrated a higher positive predictive value.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We evaluated the BD Viper LT System for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae using samples collected from symptomatic patients that included urine, vaginal swabs, and cervical samples in liquid-based cytology media. Results were compared with those obtained using the BD Viper XTR platform. The positive and negative percent agreements for all sample types were at least 95.8% and at least 96.4% for chlamydia and gonorrhea and at least 95.0% when both organisms were present, respectively. This medium throughput system performs well compared with a high-throughput platform and may offer smaller health care facilities the opportunity to test for these infections locally.Sexually transmitted diseases 09/2015; 42(9):521-523. DOI:10.1097/OLQ.0000000000000313 · 2.84 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.