Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (12)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tanikawa, M.
Right arrow Articles by Terakawa, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tanikawa, M.
Right arrow Articles by Terakawa, N.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 11, No. 11, pp. 2418-2421, 1996
© 1996 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

research-article

Immunology: Chlamydia trachomatis antibody titres by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay are useful in predicting severity of adnexal adhesion

M. Tanikawa1, T. Harada, C. Katagiri, Y. Onohara, S. Yoshida and N. Terakawa

Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Tottori University School of Medicine Yonago, 683, Japan

Correspondence: 1To whom correspondence should be addressed

The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between chlamydia infection and adnexal adhesion. A total of 131 infertile women who were otherwise asymptomatic underwent chlamydia antibody testing and laparoscopy. These women had additional infertility factors. Serum concentration of anti-Chlamydia trachomatis immunoglobulins G and A were determined prospectively by means of an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Results were compared with the tubal patency and severity of adnexal adhesion. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and likelihood ratios of anti-C.trachomatis antibody titres for the presence of adnexal adhesion were calculated. Patients who were positive for chlamydia antibody had a significantly higher incidence of tubal occlusion than those who were negative (47.1 versus 25.0%). Adnexal adhesion scores were significantly higher in the patients who were positive for chlamydia antibody than those in patients who were negative (17.1 versus 8.5). Adnexal adhesion score was significantly correlated with anti-chlamydia antibody titre by ELISA [immunoglobulin (Ig) G: r = 0.60, Ig A: r = 0.61]. As the antibody titre by ELISA rose, the specificity, positive predictive value and the positive likelihood ratio all increased. In conclusion, C.trachomatis antibody testing is a simple and inexpensive means of predicting pelvic damage and laparoscopic examination may be recommended for patients with high anti-C.trachomatis antibody titres by ELISA.

Key words: adnexal adhesion/Chlamydia trachomatis/chlamydial antibodies/ELISA/tubal damage


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
S.F.P.J. Coppus, B.C. Opmeer, S. Logan, F. van der Veen, S. Bhattacharya, and B.W.J. Mol
The predictive value of medical history taking and Chlamydia IgG ELISA antibody testing (CAT) in the selection of subfertile women for diagnostic laparoscopy: a clinical prediction model approach
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2007; 22(5): 1353 - 1358.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
E. H. Yu Ng, O. S. Tang, and P. C. Ho
Measurement of serum CA-125 concentrations does not improve the value of Chlamydia trachomatis antibody in predicting tubal pathology at laparoscopy
Hum. Reprod., April 1, 2001; 16(4): 775 - 779.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
K. Thomas, L. Coughlin, P.T. Mannion, and N.G. Haddad
The value of Chlamydia trachomatis antibody testing as part of routine infertility investigations
Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2000; 15(5): 1079 - 1082.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.