Evaluation of diagnostic tools for adult chlamydial keratoconjunctivitis

Detection of antichlamydial antibodies in tears: a diagnostic aid?

OBJECTIVES

The antibody response in sera and tears of 167 patients with suspected chlamydial conjunctivitis was compared with the antibody response in sera and tears of 45 patients with symptoms of urogenital chlamydial infection to discover whether and which type of antichlamydial antibody detected in tears may be of diagnostic help in chlamydial conjunctivitis.

METHODS

Diagnosis was based on chlamydial antigen detection from the conjunctiva and urogenital tract, done by a direct immunofluorescence assay, McCoy cell culture, and polymerase chain reaction. Additionally, antichlamydial immunoglobulin A (IgA) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) were determined in sera and tears of all patients by an immunoperoxidase assay.

RESULTS

Two hundred twelve patients were examined--167 with conjunctivitis, 45 with symptoms of urogenital chlamydial infection. Cell culture, direct immunofluorescence assay, and polymerase chain reaction brought identical results. Conjunctival specimens taken from 33 (20%) of the patients with conjunctivitis were Chlamydia antigen positive; specimens taken from 134 (80%) were negative. Antichlamydial antibodies were found in tears of 29 (88%) of the patients with conjunctivitis whose specimens were Chlamydia antigen positive. Fifty-four (40%) of the patients with conjunctivitis whose specimens were Chlamydia antigen negative had antichlamydial antibodies in their tears. Twenty-five patients with urethritis (56%) were Chlamydia antigen positive in urethral swabs; 20 (44%) were negative. Antichlamydial antibodies were found in the tears of eight (32%) of the Chlamydia antigen-positive and two (10%) of the Chlamydia antigen-negative patients with urethritis. In contrast to patients with conjunctivitis, findings for patients with urethritis always were negative for antichlamydial IgG in the tears.

CONCLUSION

Antichlamydial antibodies in tears were seen significantly more often in patients with conjunctivitis than in those with urethritis (P < or = 0.05). Antichlamydial IgG was found only in tears of patients with conjunctivitis. Therefore, the authors conclude that the detection of antichlamydial IgG in the tears might be helpful for diagnosis in patients with suspected chlamydial conjunctivitis who have antigen-negative conjunctival swabs.

Evaluation of two nonculture antigen tests and three serotests for detection of anti-chlamydial antibodies in the diagnosis of ocular chlamydial infections

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of chlamydial conjuctivitis is difficult in chronic diseases because chlamydial elementary bodies are mostly undetectable in conjunctival scrapings by cell culture. We therefore compared two nonculture antigen tests and three different serotests for anti-chlamydial antibodies with McCoy cell culture, the "gold standard" of chlamydial diagnosis. Conjunctival scrapings and serum samples of 93 patients attending the outpatient eye clinic in Graz because of chronic follicular conjunctivitis were tested.

METHODS

A total of 558 conjunctival scrapings and 93 serum samples were investigated. Chlamydial antigen detection was done by McCoy cell culture, polymerase chain reaction (PCR; Amplicor, Roche), and direct immunofluorescence assay (DFA; Microtrak, Syva). Antichlamydial IgA and IgG antibodies in the sera were detected by an immunoperoxidase assay (IPAzyme, Savyon) and two different enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (SeroELISA, Savyon and rELISA, medac).

RESULTS

Cell culture and PCR yielded identical results. The positivity rate for chlamydial conjunctivitis was 8.6% (8 of 93 patients). PCR proved most sensitive and most specific. IPAzyme was 75% sensitive for IgA and 100% for IgG; SeroELISA and rELISA were less sensitive. IPAzyme was 81% specific for IgA and 47.3% for IgG. SeroELISA and rELISA were less specific for IgA, but more specific for IgG. Post-test likelihood of disease was greatest in IPAzyme.

CONCLUSIONS

PCR proved to be a good alternative to cell culture; DFA is useful for quick diagnosis. Genus-specific serotests cannot compete with chlamydial antigen detection. They differ in sensitivity and specificity because of the antigen type they present. They are still of only supportive value in cases where chlamydial antigen detection is not possible. Recently introduced species-specific antibody tests should be of greater value.

Chlamydia keratoconjunctivitis determination of Chlamydia trachomatis specific secretory immunoglobulin A in tears by enzyme immunoassay

Determination of Chlamydia trachomatis specific antibodies in serum and tears, isolation of C. trachomatis in cell culture and C. trachomatis antigen detection by direct immunofluorescence test were evaluated for the laboratory diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis infection in 30 patients with chronic conjunctivitis. C. trachomatis specific secretory immunoglobulin A (s-IgA) was detected in the tears of all 8 patients with a positive result in culture and the direct immunofluorescence test. In 4 additional patients, the s-IgA assay of tears was also positive. A presumptive clinical diagnosis of Chlamydia conjunctivitis was correlated with the presence of s-IgA in tears. S-IgA was not detected in the serum of any of the patients, indicating that s-IgA is locally produced and not transudated from the serum. For the diagnosis of chronic Chlamydia conjunctivitis, we recommend the determination of s-IgA in tears in addition to a test for Chlamydia detection.

Immunodiagnosis of adult chlamydial conjunctivitis

This study presents data from a prospective comparison of four currently available diagnostic tests for Chlamydia trachomatis infection. Seventy-six patients clinically suspicious for chlamydial conjunctivitis were all tested with Giemsa stain cytology, direct monoclonal fluorescent antibody (DFA) microscopy, enzyme immunosorbent assay (EIA) for chlamydial antigens, and standard McCoy cell culture. When compared with primary cell culture, diagnostic Giemsa inclusions had a sensitivity and specificity of 43 and 100%, respectively, supportive Giemsa cytology 71 and 67%, the enzyme immunoassay 71 and 97%, and the monoclonal fluorescent antibody 57 and 81%. Each nonculture method has distinct advantages in terms of cost, technical difficulty, speed, and accuracy, which dictate selection of the most appropriate test for office or laboratory diagnosis of chlamydial conjunctivitis.