1995PubMedRequires access

Comparison of the Syva Microtrak enzyme immunoassay and Abbott Chlamydiazyme in the detection of chlamydial infections in women.

Margaret Olsen, Anthony R. Sambol, Virginia A. Bohnert

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

An enzyme immunoassay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen, Syva Microtrak, was compared with Abbott Chlamydiazyme to evaluate the performance of the Microtrak assay in the diagnosis of chlamydial genital tract infection in women. Duplicate endocervical swabs from 550 women were tested by both methods, and discrepancies were resolved by direct immunofluorescence on pelleted material from the collection tubes. Forty-six specimens were positive by the Syva Microtrak assay (resolved sensitivity, 95%), and 34 specimens were positive by the Chlamydiazyme assay (resolved sensitivity, 79%). The results from this small study suggest that the Syva Microtrak enzyme immunoassay is more sensitive than Chlamydiazyme for the detection of chlamydial antigen in endocervical specimens. This test should be useful for the diagnosis of chlamydial genital tract infection in females.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

An enzyme immunoassay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen, Syva Microtrak, was compared with Abbott Chlamydiazyme to evaluate the performance of the Microtrak assay in the diagnosis of chlamydial genital tract infection in women. Duplicate endocervical swabs from 550 women were tested by both methods, and discrepancies were resolved by direct immunofluorescence on pelleted material from the collection tubes. Forty-six specimens were positive by the Syva Microtrak assay (resolved sensitivity, 95%), and 34 specimens were positive by the Chlamydiazyme assay (resolved sensitivity, 79%). The results from this small study suggest that the Syva Microtrak enzyme immunoassay is more sensitive than Chlamydiazyme for the detection of chlamydial antigen in endocervical specimens. This test should be useful for the diagnosis of chlamydial genital tract infection in females.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

An enzyme immunoassay for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen, Syva Microtrak, was compared with Abbott Chlamydiazyme to evaluate the performance of the Microtrak assay in the diagnosis of chlamydial genital tract infection in women. Duplicate endocervical swabs from 550 women were tested by both methods, and discrepancies were resolved by direct immunofluorescence on pelleted material from the collection tubes. Forty-six specimens were positive by the Syva Microtrak assay (resolved sensitivity, 95%), and 34 specimens were positive by the Chlamydiazyme assay (resolved sensitivity, 79%). The results from this small study suggest that the Syva Microtrak enzyme immunoassay is more sensitive than Chlamydiazyme for the detection of chlamydial antigen in endocervical specimens. This test should be useful for the diagnosis of chlamydial genital tract infection in females.

Key concepts: Chlamydia trachomatis, Chlamydiales, Immunoassay, Chlamydiaceae, Immunofluorescence, Antigen, Sexually transmitted disease, Virology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of the Syva Microtrak enzyme immunoassay and Abbott Chlamydiazyme in the detection of chlamydial infections in women. — Research Paper | ScholarLens