J Med Microbiol Track the topics, authors and articles important to you
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Taylor-Robinson, D.
Right arrow Articles by Tuffrey, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Taylor-Robinson, D.
Right arrow Articles by Tuffrey, M.
Agricola
Right arrow Articles by Taylor-Robinson, D.
Right arrow Articles by Tuffrey, M.

The Journal of Medical Microbiology, Vol 24, Issue 2 169-173, Copyright © 1987 by Society for General Microbiology

JOURNAL ARTICLE

Comparison of detection procedures for Chlamydia trachomatis, including enzyme immunoassays, in a mouse model of genital infection

D. Taylor-Robinson and M. Tuffrey
Division of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Clinical Research Centre, Harrow, Middlesex.

Two chlamydial enzyme immunoassays, Chlamydiazyme and IDEIA, were evaluated in a mouse model of chlamydial genital-tract infection. The Chlamydiazyme assay and the IDEIA were assessed on specimens from 10 and 11 mice, respectively. The animals were infected with Chlamydia trachomatis, strain SA2f, and the results obtained by these methods on vaginal specimens taken on 4 or 5 occasions during 41-42 days were compared with those obtained in cell culture and to a less extent by the MicroTrak direct immunofluorescence test. In comparison with culture, the Chlamydiazyme assay had a sensitivity of 62% and a specificity of 92%; IDEIA had a sensitivity of 76% and a specificity of 94%. These assays sometimes did not detect chlamydiae in specimens taken immediately before specimens which proved positive by culture and the immunoassays were less sensitive if swabs were taken after those for culture. The IDEIA also failed to detect chlamydiae in the late stage of the murine infection when chlamydial elementary bodies were seen by immunofluorescence. The implications of the observations for investigations in the human field as well as for further studies in the mouse are discussed.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
INT J SYST EVOL MICROBIOL J MED MICROBIOL MICROBIOLOGY J GEN VIROL ALL SGM JOURNALS
Copyright © 1987 Society for General Microbiology.