Comparison of Three Methods of Clinical Diagnosis, Microscopic and PCR Techniques for Detection of Trichomoniasis in Women in the Yasuj City
Science Journal of Clinical Medicine
Volume 5, Issue 1, January 2016, Pages: 12-15
Received: Oct. 17, 2015; Accepted: Nov. 29, 2015; Published: Mar. 4, 2016
Views 3115      Downloads 79
Authors
Moshfe Abdolali, Cellular and Molecular Research Center, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
Khozouei Ashkzari Zohreh, Student Research Committee, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
Aramesh Shahintaj, Gynecologist, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
Ghaffari Parvin, Gynecologist, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
Ali Jamshidi, Department of Parasitology and Mycology, Yasuj University of Medical Sciences, Yasuj, Iran
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
Trichomoniasis is a protozoan disease caused by Trichomonas vaginalis and the most common non- viral sexually transmitted disease. It is the third most common agent of vaginitis. Diagnosis of the disease is based on laboratory wet smear test. In this study, we compared three methods (Clinical diagnosis, Microscopic and Polymerase Chain Reaction) who refered to Yasuj University Women’s clinic.in this cross- sectional study, 100 women with vaginitis clinical symptoms selected and after clinical diagnosis, their personal information recorded in a separate questionnaire. Vaginal samples prepared for wet smear test and PCR. Their vaginal discharge was studied in 100 patients, 23(23%) cases of clinical examination, Trichomoniasis infection was diagnosed and also 33(33%) cases infected Trichomoniasis in combination with other vaginitis. 41(41%) were positive in direct microscopic observation and 11(11%) cases were positive by PCR. From 41 positive cases in wet smear diagnosis, 28 cases were positive in clinical diagnosis, from 11 positive cases in PCR method, only 4 cases is positive in wet smear diagnosis and 4 cases is positive in clinical diagnosis. Statistically, was not found significant differences between diagnosis the clinical, microscopic and PCR. Also was not found significant difference between clinical Symptoms and diagnosis of Trichomoniasis, therefore the clinical signs alone cannot be used in the diagnosis of Trichomonas vaginalis and the reliance on clinical diagnosis of Trichomoniasis in more than 60% positive cases, which are not detected as a result of the treatment are unnecessary. PCR has a sensitivity and specificity of 100% which can be quickly and accurately identify the correct data and be treated properly. Improved T. vaginalis control efforts are imperative and require better disease recognition, clinical application of sensitive nucleic acid–based tests, and management of sexual partners.
Keywords
Trichomoniasis, Clinical Diagnosis, Microscopic Diagnosis, PCR, Yasuj
To cite this article
Moshfe Abdolali, Khozouei Ashkzari Zohreh, Aramesh Shahintaj, Ghaffari Parvin, Ali Jamshidi, Comparison of Three Methods of Clinical Diagnosis, Microscopic and PCR Techniques for Detection of Trichomoniasis in Women in the Yasuj City, Science Journal of Clinical Medicine. Vol. 5, No. 1, 2016, pp. 12-15. doi: 10.11648/j.sjcm.20160501.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2016 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
P. Simpson, "Real-time PCRs for detection of Trichomonas vaginalis beta-tubulin and 18S rRNA genes in female genital specimens", J Med Microbiol, 2007. 56(Pt 6): p. 772-7.
[2]
T. Crucitti, "Comparison of culture and different PCR assays for detection of Trichomonas vaginalis in self collected vaginal swab specimens", Sex Transm Infect, 2003. 79(5): p. 393-8.
[3]
M. J. Lusk, "Trichomonas vaginalis: underdiagnosis in urban Australia could facilitate re-emergence", Sex Transm Infect, 2010. 86(3): p. 227-30.
[4]
I. V. Radonjic, "Diagnosis of Trichomonas vaginalis infection: The sensitivities and specificities of microscopy, culture and PCR assay", Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2006. 126(1): p. 116-20.
[5]
J. Knox, "Evaluation of self-collected samples in contrast to practitioner-collected samples for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis, Neisseria gonorrhoeae, and Trichomonas vaginalis by polymerase chain reaction among women living in remote areas", Sex Transm Dis, 2002. 29(11): p. 647-54.
[6]
M. Schmitt, "Bead-based multiplex sexually transmitted infection profiling", J Infect, 2014. 69(2): p. 123-33.
[7]
B. Van Der Pol, C. S. Kraft, J. A. Williams, "Use of an adaptation of a commercially available PCR assay aimed at diagnosis of chlamydia and gonorrhea to detect Trichomonas vaginalis in urogenital specimens", J Clin Microbiol, 2006. 44(2): p. 366-73.
[8]
M. J. Patil, J.M. Nagamoti, S. C. Metgud, "Diagnosis of Trichomonas Vaginalis from Vaginal Specimens by Wet Mount Microscopy, In Pouch TV Culture System, and PCR", J Glob Infect Dis, 2012. 4(1): p. 22-5.
[9]
M. M. Hegazi, "Polymerase chain reaction versus conventional methods in the diagnosis of vaginal trichomoniasis", J Egypt Soc Parasitol, 2009. 39(1): p. 11-21.
[10]
L. Garcia-Agudo, "Diagnosis of vaginitis-vaginosis by hibridization with DNA strands", Ginecol Obstet Mex, 2013. 81(4): p. 195-200.
[11]
J. S Ryu, "Diagnosis of trichomoniasis by polymerase chain reaction", Yonsei Med J, 1999. 40(1): p. 56-60.
[12]
A. C. Sena, "Trichomonas vaginalis infection in male sexual partners: implications for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention", Clin Infect Dis, 2007. 44(1): p. 13-22.
[13]
S.A. Talari, A. Kazemi, H. Hooshyar, F. Kazemi, M. Arbabi, M.R. Talari, et al "Detection of drug resistance gene in trichomonas vaginalis by PCR", Journal of Kashan University of Medical Sciences, Spring, 2011; Vol. 15, No 1, P. 47-52.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186