Abstract

Yolk-sac inoculation of embryonated eggs was superseded 25 years ago by the use of cell cultures (often McCoy) for the isolation of Chlamydia trachomatis. Centrifugation of specimens onto the cell monolayers was shown to increase sensitivity, but little of late has further improved sensitivity which is at least ten-fold greater than that of eggs. However, culture is slow and labour intensive so that non-cultural techniques without these drawbacks have come to dominate. Direct fluorescent antibody (DFA) tests are rapid and have sensitivities that range from 70% to 100% for men and 68% to 100% for women, and specificities that range from 87% to 99% for men and 82% to 100% for women; if the tests are read by competent observers the values are at the top end of the ranges. The detection rate may be enhanced even further by relatively low-speed centrifugation of specimens before staining. Skilled reading is not a feature of enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) which according to the literature have sensitivities that range from 62% to 97% for men and 64% to 100% for women, and specificities that range from 92% to 100% for men and 89% to 100% for women. However, comparison against poor reference tests is responsible for most of the higher values and the clinician should not be misled into believing that EIAs have excellent sensitivity; the lower values in the ranges are closer to reality. Furthermore, EIAs that are being designed for use by general practitioners should be regarded with the greatest caution since lack of sensitivity means that chlamydia-positive patients will go undetected. The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is not bedevilled by insensitivity but it is no more sensitive than the most sensitive cell culture or DFA tests. PCR is unsuitable for routine diagnosis but has a place as a research tool. For men, examination of "first-catch" urine samples by the best of the non-cultural procedures provides an acceptable non-invasive approach to diagnosis; for women, the value of examining urine may be less, but needs to be thoroughly tested. However, there is little doubt that a Cytobrush used to obtain cervical specimens holds no practical advantage over a swab. Serological tests are reliant on the provision of paired sera for making a diagnosis; high antibody titres in single sera may be suggestive of an aetiological association in deep-seated chlamydial infections (epididymitis, arthritis, salpingitis, etc), but unequivocal interpretation is unusual, particularly in an individual case, since the distinction between a current and past infection is problematical.

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

• Kellogg JA. Clinical and laboratory considerations of culture vs antigen assays for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis from genital specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1989 May;113(5):453–460. [PubMed]
• Mahony JB, Chernesky MA. Effect of swab type and storage temperature on the isolation of Chlamydia trachomatis from clinical specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 1985 Nov;22(5):865–867. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Mandal D, Ray TK, Richmond SJ, Goorney BP, Haye KR. Comparison of cotton wool swab and cytobrush for detection of chlamydial infection in women attending a genitourinary medicine clinic. Int J STD AIDS. 1991 Jan-Feb;2(1):49–51. [PubMed]
• Jones RB, Katz BP, van der Pol B, Caine VA, Batteiger BE, Newhall WJ. Effect of blind passage and multiple sampling on recovery of Chlamydia trachomatis from urogenital specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 1986 Dec;24(6):1029–1033. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Manuel AR, Veeravahu M, Matthews RS, Clay JC. Pooled specimens for Chlamydia trachomatis: new approach to increase yield and cost efficiency. Genitourin Med. 1987 Jun;63(3):172–175. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Dunlop EM, Goh BT, Darougar S, Woodland R. Triple-culture tests for diagnosis of chlamydial infection of the female genital tract. Sex Transm Dis. 1985 Apr-Jun;12(2):68–71. [PubMed]
• Singal SS, Reichman RC, Graman PS, Greisberger C, Trupei MA, Menegus MA. Isolation of Chlamydia trachomatis from men with urethritis: relative value of one vs. two swabs and influence of concomitant gonococcal infection. Sex Transm Dis. 1986 Jan-Mar;13(1):50–52. [PubMed]
• Smith TF, Weed LA. Comparison of urethral swabs, urine, and urinary sediment for the isolation of Chlamydia. J Clin Microbiol. 1976 Aug;2(2):134–135. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Chernesky M, Castriciano S, Sellors J, Stewart I, Cunningham I, Landis S, Seidelman W, Grant L, Devlin C, Mahony J. Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigens in urine as an alternative to swabs and cultures. J Infect Dis. 1990 Jan;161(1):124–126. [PubMed]
• Caul EO, Paul ID, Milne JD, Crowley T. Non-invasive sampling method for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis. Lancet. 1988 Nov 26;2(8622):1246–1247. [PubMed]
• Jawad AJ, Manuel G, Matthews R, Wise R, Clay JC. Evaluation of a genus-specific monoclonal antibody in an amplified enzyme-linked immunoassay in the detection of Chlamydia in urine samples from men. Sex Transm Dis. 1990 Apr-Jun;17(2):87–89. [PubMed]
• Hay PE, Thomas BJ, Gilchrist C, Palmer HM, Gilroy CB, Taylor-Robinson D. The value of urine samples from men with non-gonococcal urethritis for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis. Genitourin Med. 1991 Apr;67(2):124–128. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Ciotti RA, Sondheimer SJ, Nachamkin I. Detecting Chlamydia trachomatis by direct immunofluorescence using a Cytobrush sampling technique. Genitourin Med. 1988 Aug;64(4):245–246. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Taylor-Robinson D. Detecting Chlamydia trachomatis by direct immunofluorescence using a Cytobrush sampling technique. Genitourin Med. 1989 Apr;65(2):130–130. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Weiland TL, Noller KL, Smith TF, Ory SJ. Comparison of Dacron-tipped applicator and cytobrush for detection of chlamydial infections. J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Nov;26(11):2437–2438. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Lees MI, Newnan DM, Plackett M, Traynor PW, Forsyth JR, Garland SM. A comparison of cytobrush and cotton swab sampling for the detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by cell culture. Genitourin Med. 1990 Aug;66(4):267–269. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Kellogg JA, Seiple JW, Levisky JS. Efficacy of duplicate genital specimens and repeated testing for confirming positive results for chlamydiazyme detection of Chlamydia trachomatis antigen. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Jun;27(6):1218–1221. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Judson BA, Lambert PP. Improved Syva MicroTrak Chlamydia trachomatis direct test method. J Clin Microbiol. 1988 Dec;26(12):2657–2658. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Moncada J, Schachter J, Shipp M, Bolan G, Wilber J. Cytobrush in collection of cervical specimens for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis. J Clin Microbiol. 1989 Aug;27(8):1863–1866. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Forster GE, Cookey I, Munday PE, Richman PI, Jha R, Coleman D, Thomas BJ, Hawkins DA, Evans RT, Taylor-Robinson D. Investigation into the value of Papanicolaou stained cervical smears for the diagnosis of chlamydial cervical infection. J Clin Pathol. 1985 Apr;38(4):399–402. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
• Shafer MA, Chew KL, Kromhout LK, Beck A, Sweet RL, Schachter J, King EB. Chlamydial endocervical infections and cytologic findings in sexually active female adolescents. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Mar 15;151(6):765–771. [PubMed]
• Arroyo G, Linnemann C, Wesseler T. Role of the Papanicolaou smear in diagnosis of chlamydial infections. Sex Transm Dis. 1989 Jan-Mar;16(1):11–14. [PubMed]
• Sekhri A, Le Faou AE, Tardieu JC, Antz M, Fabre M. What can be expected from the cytologic examination of cervicovaginal smears for the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infections? Acta Cytol. 1988 Nov-Dec;32(6):805–810. [PubMed]