- citati u SCIndeksu: 0
- citati u CrossRef-u:0
- citati u Google Scholaru:[
 ]
- posete u poslednjih 30 dana:3
- preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:2
|
|
|
2013, vol. 141, br. 3-4, str. 187-191
|
|
Infekcija grlića materice bakterijom Chlamydia trachomatis kod studentkinja - dijagnostika klasičnim i molekularnim metodama
The diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis cervical infection among students by using classical and molecular methods
aKlinički centar Srbije, Klinika za ginekologiju i akušerstvo, Beograd bZavod za zdravstvenu zaštitu studenata, Beograd cUniverzitet u Beogradu, Medicinski fakultet, Institut za mikrobiologiju i imunologiju
e-adresa: bobadi@sezampro.rs
Sažetak
Uvod. Chlamydia trachomatis je najčešći bakterijski uzročnik polno prenosivih infekcija. Mogućnost razvoja teških komplikacija ovih infekcija može se sprečiti blagovremenim otkrivanjem ove bakterije na grliću materice primenom osetljivih i pouzdanih testova, kao što su savremeni molekularni testovi. Cilj rada. Cilj istraživanja je bio da se ispitaju mogućnost i učestalost dijagnostikovanja infekcije grlića materice bakterijom C. trachomatis kod studentkinja primenom klasičnih i molekularnih metoda. Metode rada. Postojanje C. trachomatis u endocervikalnom brisu 69 studentkinja bez simptoma oboljenja dokazano je primenom tri metode: direktne imunofluorescencije (DIF), hibridizacije nukleinske kiseline (hc2) i reakcije lančanog umnožavanja nukleinske kiseline (PCR). Rezultati. Metodom DIF C. trachomatis je otkrivena kod četiri ispitanice (5,80%), metodom hc2 kod takođe četiri (5,80%), a primenom PCR kod šest studentkinja (8,70%). Uporedna analiza primene DIF s metodom PCR pokazala je senzitivnost od 46% i specifičnost od 95%, uporedna analiza primene DIF s metodom hc2 pokazala je senzitivnost od 62% i specifičnost od 97%, dok je uporedna analiza primene hc2 s metodom PCR pokazala senzitivnost od 76% i specifičnost od 100%. Zaključak. Metoda izbora za dijagnostikovanje C. trachomatis na grliću materice kod mladih osoba bez simptoma oboljenja je PCR, savremena molekularna metoda.
Abstract
Introduction. Chlamydia trachomatis is the most common cause of sexually transmitted disease. The possibility of serious complications may be prevented by early detection of the bacteria on the uterine cervix by the application of sensitive and reliable tests such as up-to-date molecular tests. Objective. The aim of the study was the comparison of sensitivity and specificity of three different methods in the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Methods. The study included 69 female students referred to the gynecological outpatient unit at the Students' Polyclinic for colposcopic examination of the uterine cervix. Cervical Chlamydia trachomatis was diagnosed by using three different methods: direct immunofluorescence (DIF), nucleic acid hybridization assay (hc2), and polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Results. By using DIF Chlamydia trachomatis was identified in four students (5.80%), by using hc2 also in four (5.80%), while by using PCR test in six students (8.70%). Comparative analysis of the obtained results evidenced sensitivity and specificity rates of DIF in comparison to PCR method of 46% and 95%, respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of DIF method in comparison to hc2 was 62% and 97%. Sensitivity and specificity of hc2 method in comparison to PCR was 76% and 100%. Conclusion. Contemporary molecular methods, such as PCR, are methods of choice for the identification of endocervical Chlamydia trachomatis in the population of university students without symptoms of the disease.
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
  
|
Aldeen, T., Jacobs, J., Powell, R. (2010) Screening university students for genital chlamydial infection: another lesson to learn. Sexual Health, 7(4): 491
|
|
|
Arustamian, K.K. (2006) Comparative analysis of methods for diagnostics of chlamydial infection in women of reproductive age. Georgian medical news, (139): 73-5
|
|
|
Colliers, A., Verster, A., van Puyenbroeck, K., Stalpaert, M., van Royen, P., Verhoeven, V. (2009) Screening Belgian university students for Chlamydia trachomatis infection: A feasibility study. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 21(3): 343-346
|
|
|
da Ros, C.T., da Schmitt, C.S. (2008) Global epidemiology of sexually transmitted diseases. Asian Journal of Andrology, 10(1): 110-114
|
|
|
Darwin, L.H., Cullen, A.P., Arthur, P.M., Long, C.D., Smith, K.R., Girdner, J.L., Hook, E.W., Quinn, T.C., Lorincz, A.T. (2002) Comparison of Digene Hybrid Capture 2 and Conventional Culture for Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in Cervical Specimens. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 40(2): 641-644
|
|
|
Dean, D. (2009) Chlamydia trachomatis today: treatment, detection, immunogenetics and the need for a greater global understanding of chlamydial disease pathogenesis. Drugs, 45: 25-31
|
|
|
Fenton, K.A. (2004) National screening programme for chlamydia exists in England. BMJ, 329(7458): 172-172
|
|
|
Hadgu, A., Sternberg, M. (2009) Reproducibility and specificity concerns associated with nucleic acid amplification tests for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis. European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 28(1): 9-15
|
|
|
Kucinskiene, V., Sutaite, I., Valiukeviciene, S., Milasauskiene, Z., Domeika, M. (2006) Prevalence and risk factors of genital Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 42(11): 885-94
|
|
|
Louie, M., Louie, L., Simor, A.E. (2000) The role of DNA amplification technology in the diagnosis of infectious diseases. CMAJ, 163(3): 301-9
|
|
|
Manavi, K. (2006) A review on infection with Chlamydia trachomatis. Best Practice & Research Clinical Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 20(6): 941-951
|
|
1
|
Miller, K.E. (2006) Diagnosis and treatment of Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Am. Fam. Physician, 73, 1411-1416
|
|
|
Morré, S.A., Rozendaal, L., van Valkengoed, I.G., Boeke, A.J., van Voorst, V.P.C., Schirm, J., de Blok, S., van Den, H.J.A., van Doornum, G.J., Meijer, C.J., van Den, B.A.J. (2000) Urogenital Chlamydia trachomatis serovars in men and women with a symptomatic or asymptomatic infection: an association with clinical manifestations?. Journal of clinical microbiology, 38(6): 2292-6
|
|
|
Morris, S.R., Bauer, H.M., Chartier, M., Howard, H., Watson, S., Yokotobi, J., Taylor, A.F., Bolan, G. (2010) Relative efficiency of chlamydia screening in non-clinical settings in two California counties. International Journal of STD & AIDS, 21(1): 52-56
|
|
2
|
Østergaard, L. (2002) Microbiological aspects of the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis. Best practice & research. Clinical obstetrics & gynaecology, 16(6): 789-99
|
|
|
Pavlin, N.L., Gunn, J.M., Parker, R., Fairley, C.K., Hocking, J. (2006) Implementing chlamydia screening: what do women think? A systematic review of the literature. BMC public health, 6: 221
|
|
1
|
Spiliopoulou, A., Lakiotis, V., Vittoraki, A., Zavou, D., Mauri, D. (2005) Chlamydia trachomatis: Time for screening?. Clinical microbiology and infection, 11(9): 687-9
|
|
1
|
Stamm, W.E. (2004) Chlamydia screening: Expanding the scope. Ann. Intern. Med., 141, str. 570-2
|
|
1
|
van Dyck, E., Ieven, M., Pattyn, S., van Damme, L., Laga, M. (2001) Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae by Enzyme Immunoassay, Culture, and Three Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests. Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 39(5): 1751-1756
|
|
|
Welsh, L.E., Quinn, T.C., Gaydos, C.A. (1997) Influence of endocervical specimen adequacy on PCR and direct fluorescent-antibody staining for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis infections. Journal of clinical microbiology, 35(12): 3078-81
|
|
|
|
|