4.7 Article

Comparison of Aptima Trichomonas vaginalis Transcription-Mediated Amplification Assay and BD Affirm VPIII for Detection of T-vaginalis in Symptomatic Women: Performance Parameters and Epidemiological Implications

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 866-869

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02367-10

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trichomonas vaginalis is an underestimated sexually transmitted infection (STI) associated with numerous clinical sequelae. The true prevalence and clinical impact of trichomoniasis are unknown, as current methods of detection exhibit poor sensitivity compared to molecular amplification methods. Limited data exist comparing the BD Affirm VPIII hybridization assay to the Gen-Probe Aptima T. vaginalis (ATV) transcription-mediated amplification (TMA) assay for detection of T. vaginalis. In this study, specimens from 766 patients were evaluated. Specimens were retrieved consecutively from patients with vaginal complaints and/or with histories suggestive of STI. Study inclusion was dependent upon the request for and collection of both a vaginal swab for Affirm and a specimen for Aptima Combo 2 by the health care provider during the same office visit. Affirm was performed using the specific collection swab and the transport provided for the test. The ATV assay was performed on remnant Aptima Combo 2 specimens. A second ATV TMA assay, utilizing an alternate T. vaginalis primer and probe set, was performed on all specimens positive by the initial TMA and/or the Affirm assay. Infected-patient status was defined as positive T. vaginalis test results by at least 2 assays. Overall, 5.1% of subjects were positive for T. vaginalis. T. vaginalis was most prevalent in women who were 36 to 45 (11.9%), 51 to 60 (7.7%), and 16 to 25 (4.2%) years of age. The ATV assay was statistically more sensitive than the Affirm assay (100% versus 63.4%, P < 0.0001), identifying 36.6% more positive patients.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据