Accuracy of self-collection versus cervical sampling for the molecular diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae in women attending gynecological services.

IF 1.4
Gabriela Vasco, Cecilia Cruz, Paterson Peñaherrera, Katherine Tipán, Sandy Pila, Karol Guzmán, Marisol Cabascango, Katherine Logacho, Patricio Jácome
{"title":"Accuracy of self-collection versus cervical sampling for the molecular diagnosis of <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> and <i>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</i> in women attending gynecological services.","authors":"Gabriela Vasco, Cecilia Cruz, Paterson Peñaherrera, Katherine Tipán, Sandy Pila, Karol Guzmán, Marisol Cabascango, Katherine Logacho, Patricio Jácome","doi":"10.61622/rbgo/2025rbgo31","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Successful measures to address the increasing prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) require practical and accessible education and detection programs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The ability to detect <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> and <i>Neisseria gonorrhoeae</i> may be hindered by a lack of adherence to proper cervical sampling. To address this, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of self-obtained samplings, such as self-collection and first-catch urine samples, to cervical samples taken by a practitioner using the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) cobas<sup>®</sup> 4800 for <i>C. trachomatis</i> and <i>N. gonorrhoeae</i> in 244 women attending gynecological services in Quito, Ecuador. Regardless of sampling method, only 12 patients tested positive for <i>C. trachomatis</i> (4.9% prevalence, 95% CI 2.8 to 8.4%), and no samples tested positive for <i>N. gonorrhoeae</i>.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis revealed that self-collection was 100% sensitive (95% CI 66.4% to 100.0%) and 100% specific (95% CI 98.25%-100%), and first-catch urine was 90% sensitive (95% CI 55.5% to 99.8%), and 99% specific (95% CI 96.5% to 99.9%) compared to cervical brushing for the detection of <i>C. trachomatis</i>. No symptoms were associated with a positive <i>C. trachomatis</i> result, highlighting the need for testing even in asymptomatic patients. Furthermore, having a stable intimate relationship in the past year was associated with a negative result for <i>C. trachomatis</i> (χ<sup>2</sup> 14.01, <i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study demonstrates the feasibility and reliability of self-collection and first-catch urine samples as alternative methods for detecting <i>Chlamydia trachomatis</i> and has practical implications for improving STI detection and management programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":74699,"journal":{"name":"Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia","volume":"47 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12266874/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.61622/rbgo/2025rbgo31","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Successful measures to address the increasing prevalence of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) require practical and accessible education and detection programs.

Methods: The ability to detect Chlamydia trachomatis and Neisseria gonorrhoeae may be hindered by a lack of adherence to proper cervical sampling. To address this, we compared the sensitivity and specificity of self-obtained samplings, such as self-collection and first-catch urine samples, to cervical samples taken by a practitioner using the nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) cobas® 4800 for C. trachomatis and N. gonorrhoeae in 244 women attending gynecological services in Quito, Ecuador. Regardless of sampling method, only 12 patients tested positive for C. trachomatis (4.9% prevalence, 95% CI 2.8 to 8.4%), and no samples tested positive for N. gonorrhoeae.

Results: The analysis revealed that self-collection was 100% sensitive (95% CI 66.4% to 100.0%) and 100% specific (95% CI 98.25%-100%), and first-catch urine was 90% sensitive (95% CI 55.5% to 99.8%), and 99% specific (95% CI 96.5% to 99.9%) compared to cervical brushing for the detection of C. trachomatis. No symptoms were associated with a positive C. trachomatis result, highlighting the need for testing even in asymptomatic patients. Furthermore, having a stable intimate relationship in the past year was associated with a negative result for C. trachomatis2 14.01, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: This study demonstrates the feasibility and reliability of self-collection and first-catch urine samples as alternative methods for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis and has practical implications for improving STI detection and management programs.

Abstract Image

妇科妇女沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌分子诊断的自我采集与宫颈抽样的准确性
目标:要想成功解决性传播感染(STIs)日益流行的问题,就需要切实可行的教育和检测方案。方法:检测沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌的能力可能会因缺乏适当的宫颈采样而受到阻碍。为了解决这一问题,我们比较了在厄瓜多尔基多接受妇科服务的244名妇女使用cobas®4800核酸扩增试验(NAAT)采集的宫颈沙眼衣原体和淋病奈瑟菌样本与自采样本(如自采和首次采集尿液样本)的敏感性和特异性。无论采用何种抽样方法,只有12名患者沙眼衣原体检测呈阳性(患病率为4.9%,95% CI为2.8至8.4%),没有样本检测淋病奈撒菌呈阳性。结果:分析显示,与宫颈刷检相比,自行采集检测沙眼衣原体的敏感性为100% (95% CI 66.4% ~ 100.0%),特异性为100% (95% CI 98.25% ~ 100%),首次采集尿液检测沙眼衣原体的敏感性为90% (95% CI 55.5% ~ 99.8%),特异性为99% (95% CI 96.5% ~ 99.9%)。沙眼原体检测结果呈阳性并无相关症状,这突出了即使在无症状患者中也需要进行检测。此外,在过去一年中有稳定的亲密关系与沙眼原体检测呈阴性相关(χ2 14.01, p < 0.001)。结论:本研究验证了自行采集尿样和首次采集尿样作为沙眼衣原体检测方法的可行性和可靠性,对改进STI检测和管理方案具有实际意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信