This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
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 arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schwebke, J R
Right arrow Articles by Stamm, W E
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schwebke, J R
Right arrow Articles by Stamm, W E

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Clin Microbiol. 1991 November; 29(11): 2446-2449

Use of a urine enzyme immunoassay as a diagnostic tool for Chlamydia trachomatis urethritis in men.

J R Schwebke, A M Clark, M B Pettinger, P Nsubga and W E Stamm

Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle 98195.

ABSTRACT

We collected first-voided urine specimens from 659 males attending a sexually transmitted disease clinic and performed both enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for detection of chlamydial antigen and leukocyte esterase testing on these urine samples. The overall prevalence of chlamydial urethritis in the study population as determined by culture of urethral swabs was 11%. However, 46% of all men in the study had no symptoms of urethritis. Compared with urethral cultures for chlamydiae, the urine EIA had a sensitivity of 42% and a specificity of 99%. The sensitivity of the EIA strongly correlated with the amount of antigen present in culture as assessed by numbers of inclusion-forming units. The sensitivity of the leukocyte esterase test compared with that of chlamydia culture was 88%. We conclude that in this population of men, which included many patients without symptoms of urethritis, the urine EIA was a relatively insensitive means of screening for chlamydial infection.


J Clin Microbiol. 1991 November; 29(11): 2446-2449




This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Kacena, K. A., Quinn, S. B., Howell, M. R., Madico, G. E., Quinn, T. C., Gaydos, C. A. (1998). Pooling Urine Samples for Ligase Chain Reaction Screening for Genital Chlamydia trachomatis Infection in Asymptomatic Women. J. Clin. Microbiol. 36: 481-485 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Kellogg, J. A., Vanderhoff, B. T., Seiple, J. W., Hick, M. E. (1994). Comparison of First-Voided Urine Specimens With Endocervical Swab Specimens for Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in Women. Arch Fam Med 3: 672-675 [Abstract]  
  • Shafer, M.-A., Schachter, J., Moncada, J., Keogh, J., Pantell, R., Gourlay, L., Eyre, S., Boyer, C. B. (1993). Evaluation of Urine-Based Screening Strategies to Detect Chlamydia trachomatis Among Sexually Active Asymptomatic Young Males. JAMA 270: 2065-2070 [Abstract]  
  • Hedrum, A, Lundeberg, J, Pahlson, C, Uhlen, M (1992). Immunomagnetic recovery of Chlamydia trachomatis from urine with subsequent colorimetric DNA detection.. Genome Res 2: 167-171 [Abstract]