Cargando…

Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women

The three main causes of vaginitis are bacterial vaginosis (BV), vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC), and trichomoniasis (TV). Two multiplex assays are commercially available for detection of DNA from organisms associated with vaginitis: BD Affirm™ VPIII Microbial Identification Test (Affirm) and BD MAX™...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Thompson, Alexandra, Timm, Karen, Borders, Noelle, Montoya, Liz, Culbreath, Karissa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6962287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31502121
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-019-03694-w
_version_ 1783488131958308864
author Thompson, Alexandra
Timm, Karen
Borders, Noelle
Montoya, Liz
Culbreath, Karissa
author_facet Thompson, Alexandra
Timm, Karen
Borders, Noelle
Montoya, Liz
Culbreath, Karissa
author_sort Thompson, Alexandra
collection PubMed
description The three main causes of vaginitis are bacterial vaginosis (BV), vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC), and trichomoniasis (TV). Two multiplex assays are commercially available for detection of DNA from organisms associated with vaginitis: BD Affirm™ VPIII Microbial Identification Test (Affirm) and BD MAX™ Vaginal Panel (MAX VP). Here, the performance of MAX VP was compared to that of Affirm, which was considered the standard of care. Four vaginal swabs were collected from each subject with the following: BD Affirm™ VPIII Ambient Temperature Transport System (ATTS), BD MAX™ UVE Specimen Collection Kit, Hologic Aptima® Vaginal Swab Specimen Collection Kit, and BD ESwab™ collection and transport system (ESwab). Candida culture, Gram stain followed by Nugent scoring, and the Hologic Aptima® Trichomonas vaginalis assay were used for discordant analysis. Results were considered true positive if there were at least two tests positive for any vaginitis target. A total of 200 symptomatic women were evaluated in the study. The sensitivity and specificity of MAX VP for BV was 96.2% and 96.1%, respectively, compared to 96.2% and 81.6% for Affirm. The sensitivity and specificity of MAX VP for Candida spp. was 98.4% and 95.4%, respectively, compared to 69.4% and 100% for Affirm. MAX VP and Affirm showed 100% concordance for detection of TV. These results demonstrate improved accuracy of MAX VP compared to Affirm for the detection of BV and Candida spp. and no difference for detection of TV between the two tests.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6962287
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69622872020-01-30 Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women Thompson, Alexandra Timm, Karen Borders, Noelle Montoya, Liz Culbreath, Karissa Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis Original Article The three main causes of vaginitis are bacterial vaginosis (BV), vulvovaginal candidiasis (VVC), and trichomoniasis (TV). Two multiplex assays are commercially available for detection of DNA from organisms associated with vaginitis: BD Affirm™ VPIII Microbial Identification Test (Affirm) and BD MAX™ Vaginal Panel (MAX VP). Here, the performance of MAX VP was compared to that of Affirm, which was considered the standard of care. Four vaginal swabs were collected from each subject with the following: BD Affirm™ VPIII Ambient Temperature Transport System (ATTS), BD MAX™ UVE Specimen Collection Kit, Hologic Aptima® Vaginal Swab Specimen Collection Kit, and BD ESwab™ collection and transport system (ESwab). Candida culture, Gram stain followed by Nugent scoring, and the Hologic Aptima® Trichomonas vaginalis assay were used for discordant analysis. Results were considered true positive if there were at least two tests positive for any vaginitis target. A total of 200 symptomatic women were evaluated in the study. The sensitivity and specificity of MAX VP for BV was 96.2% and 96.1%, respectively, compared to 96.2% and 81.6% for Affirm. The sensitivity and specificity of MAX VP for Candida spp. was 98.4% and 95.4%, respectively, compared to 69.4% and 100% for Affirm. MAX VP and Affirm showed 100% concordance for detection of TV. These results demonstrate improved accuracy of MAX VP compared to Affirm for the detection of BV and Candida spp. and no difference for detection of TV between the two tests. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2019-09-09 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC6962287/ /pubmed/31502121 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-019-03694-w Text en © The Author(s) 2019 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Article
Thompson, Alexandra
Timm, Karen
Borders, Noelle
Montoya, Liz
Culbreath, Karissa
Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
title Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
title_full Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
title_fullStr Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
title_full_unstemmed Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
title_short Diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
title_sort diagnostic performance of two molecular assays for the detection of vaginitis in symptomatic women
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6962287/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31502121
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10096-019-03694-w
work_keys_str_mv AT thompsonalexandra diagnosticperformanceoftwomolecularassaysforthedetectionofvaginitisinsymptomaticwomen
AT timmkaren diagnosticperformanceoftwomolecularassaysforthedetectionofvaginitisinsymptomaticwomen
AT bordersnoelle diagnosticperformanceoftwomolecularassaysforthedetectionofvaginitisinsymptomaticwomen
AT montoyaliz diagnosticperformanceoftwomolecularassaysforthedetectionofvaginitisinsymptomaticwomen
AT culbreathkarissa diagnosticperformanceoftwomolecularassaysforthedetectionofvaginitisinsymptomaticwomen