Detection of infections of the eye with Chlamydia trachomatis by the polymerase chain reaction

Diagnosis of infectious diseases of the eye

Specific therapy of ocular infections often requires etiological diagnosis that is a combined effect of observation of characteristic clinical features and microbiological investigations. Clinical impression is central to guiding the laboratory investigation, and the aim of laboratory investigation is to confirm or rule out the clinical diagnosis. However, clinical features may vary considerably, and no one clinical feature may be pathognomonic of a particular pathogen. In addition, there may be a racial, geographical, and climatic difference in the distribution and type of causative agents associated with infections. Ophthalmologists have at their disposal in vivo and in vitro methods of diagnosis of ocular infections. The expertise of the clinician and the microbiologist along with the facilities available, determine the success with accurate diagnosis. A wide range of conventional and molecular techniques are available that not only provide rapid diagnosis for known common infections but have the potential to bring to the fore unknown organisms that may be associated with ocular infections.

Clinical examination and laboratory tests for estimation of trachoma prevalence in a remote setting: what are they really telling us?

Worldwide, an estimated 84 million people have active trachoma and 7.6 million people have trachomatous trichiasis. WHO's SAFE strategy is an effective tool in the worldwide effort to eliminate blinding trachoma, but its institution and monitoring requires a simple, reliable, and cost-effective method to detect disease. To date, clinical examination has provided the main method of diagnosis. Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis with nucleic acid amplification tests does not always correlate well with clinical findings, which has prompted the suggestion that these methods should replace clinical examination. However, a review of the research carried out in animals and human beings suggests the relation between laboratory tests and clinical examination is due to the kinetics of trachoma and not to an inherent problem in either detection system. Given the increased difficulties of using laboratory tests in parts of the world where trachoma is endemic, we should not abandon clinical grading as a tool to assess the need for, and the effectiveness of, trachoma intervention programmes.