Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) ›› 2021, Vol. 53 ›› Issue (4): 785-788. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2021.04.027

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Comparison of two methods for detection of Chlamydia trachomatis and Ureaplasma urealyticum in male reproductive tract

DU Qiang1,HONG Kai2,PAN Bo-chen1,Δ()   

  1. 1. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang 110004, China
    2. Department of Urology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China
  • Received:2021-04-01 Online:2021-08-18 Published:2021-08-25
  • Contact: Bo-chen PAN E-mail:panbochen@cmu.edu.cn
  • Supported by:
    National Key Research and Development Project(2018YFC1004202);Beijing Natural Science Foundation(7182177);China Postdoctoral Science Foundation(2017M623438)

RICH HTML

  

Abstract:

Objective: To investigate the value of clinical application of simultaneous amplification and testing of RNA (SAT-RNA) for detecting Chlamydia trachomatis (CT) and Ureaplasma urealyticum (UU) by comparing with the polymerase chain reaction testing of DNA (PCR-DNA) method. Methods: Specimens from both urethra swab and the first avoid urine which should be at least one hour after the previous urination were collected from 163 men who were scheduled for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment due to female factors at Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shengjing Hospital of China Medical University during the period of April 2016 to April 2017. Among the 163 men, 109 simultaneously provided semen that was collected after 3-7 days of sexual abstinence for the testing. Urine and semen specimens were detected for CT and UU with SAT-RNA, while urethra swab specimens were detected for CT and UU with standard PCR-DNA. Detection results of the SAT-RNA were compared with those of the PCR-DNA method. Results: The positive rate of UU in the urethra swab detected with PCR-DNA and that of UU in the urine with SAT-RNA were 47.24% and 47.85%, respectively, and the coincidence rate was 93.25%. In addition, the positive and negative coincidence rates were 93.51% and 93.02%, respectively, and the concordance between the two methods was very good (Kappa=0.865). On the other hand, the positive rate of CT in the swab specimen tested with PCR-DNA was 3.07% and that of CT in urine with SAT-RNA was 4.29%, and the coincidence rate was 97.55%. Moreover, the positive and negative coincidence rates were 80.00% and 98.10%, respectively, and the concordance between the two methods was good (Kappa=0.654). Regarding SAT-RNA detection of UU in the urine and semen specimen of the 109 patients, the positive rates of UU in the urine and semen specimens were 50.46% and 44.95%, respectively; and the coincidence rate between the two specimens was 88.99%. In addition, the positive coincidence rate and the negative coincidence rate was 93.88% and 85.00%, respectively, and the concordance between the two specimens was good (Kappa=0.780). Similarly, SAT-RNA detection of CT in the urine and semen specimens showed the positive rate was 5.50% and 3.67%, respectively; and the two specimens showed 98.17% coincidence rate. The positive and negative coincidence rates were 100.00% and 98.10%, respectively, and the concordance was also good (Kappa=0.791). Conclusion: SAT-RNA detection of CT and UU in the urine specimen showed good concordance with the PCR-DNA detection of CT and UU in the urethra swab specimen. In addition, the concordance was also good between the urine and semen specimens detected with SAT-RNA. These results indicate that, as a less invasive and equally accurate procedure, SAT-RNA may be more suitable for clinical application.

Key words: Reproductive tract infections, Chlamydia trachomatis, Ureaplasma urealyticum, Male, Simultaneous amplification and testing

CLC Number: 

  • R691.3

Table 1

Comparison of different detection methods for Ureaplasma urealyticum in male genital tract"

Urine (SAT-RNA) Urethral swab (PCR-DNA) Total
+ -
+ 72 6 78
- 5 80 85
Total 77 86 163

Table 2

Comparison of different detection methods for Chlamydia trachomatis in male genital tract"

Urine (SAT-RNA) Urethral swab (PCR-DNA) Total
+ -
+ 4 3 7
- 1 155 156
Total 5 158 163

Table 3

Comparison of SAT-RNA detection of Ureaplasma urealyticum in different samples of the male genital tract"

Urine (SAT-RNA) Semen (SAT-RNA) Total
+ -
+ 46 9 55
- 3 51 54
Total 49 60 109

Table 4

Comparison of SAT-RNA detection of Chlamydia trachomatis in different samples of the male genital tract"

Urine (SAT-RNA) Semen (SAT-RNA) Total
+ -
+ 4 2 6
- 0 103 103
Total 4 105 109
[1] Moi H, Blee K, Horner PJ. Management of non-gonococcal urethritis [J]. BMC Infect Dis, 2015, 15:294.
doi: 10.1186/s12879-015-1043-4
[2] 《非淋菌性尿道炎病原学诊断专家共识》编写组, 商学军. 非淋菌性尿道炎病原学诊断专家共识 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2016, 22(11):1038-1043.
[3] 骆振刚, 李瑞鹏, 王彦彬, 等. 实时荧光核酸恒温扩增技术检测泌尿生殖道生殖支原体感染临床观察 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2019, 25(6):535-538.
[4] 中华医学会. 临床诊疗指南辅助生殖技术与精子库分册[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2019.
[5] Davies MJ, Rumbold AR, Marino JL, et al. Maternal factors and the risk of birth defects after IVF and ICSI: A whole of population cohort study [J]. BJOG, 2017, 124(10):1537-1544.
doi: 10.1111/bjo.2017.124.issue-10
[6] 王千秋, 刘全忠, 徐金华. 梅毒、淋病、生殖器疱疹、生殖道沙眼衣原体感染诊疗指南(2014) [J]. 中华皮肤科杂志, 2014, 47(5):365-372.
[7] 李婧, 岳晓丽, 张家晖, 等. 全球生殖道沙眼衣原体感染的流行状况 [J]. 国际流行病学传染病学杂志, 2020, 47(5):419-422.
[8] 韦剑洪, 方小武, 张旭宾, 等. 沙眼衣原体感染对不育男性精子质量的影响 [J]. 中华疾病控制杂志, 2012, 16(8):724-725.
[9] Huang C, Long X, Jing S, et al. Ureaplasma urealyticum and Mycoplasma hominis infections and semen quality in 19 098 infertile men in China [J]. World J Urol, 2016, 34(7):1039-1044.
doi: 10.1007/s00345-015-1724-z
[10] Zhang L, Zhang KP, Liang CZ. Ureaplasma urealyticum in male genital tract: A hidden risk factor for male infertility [J]. Andrologia, 2016, 48(10):1077-1079.
doi: 10.1111/and.12577 pmid: 27897333
[11] 郑渠, 刘玮, 张国巍, 等. RNA恒温扩增法与培养法检测解脲脲原体结果比较分析 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2017, 23(8):717-721.
[12] 王彦彬, 诸靖宇, 李瑞鹏, 等. 实时荧光核酸恒温扩增技术在泌尿生殖道解脲脲原体感染中的应用 [J]. 中华医院感染学杂志, 2016, 26(23):5322-5324.
[13] 韩燕, 陈凯, 朱邦勇, 等. 实时荧光核酸恒温扩增技术检测无创样本沙眼衣原体的性能 [J]. 国际流行病学传染病学杂志, 2020, 47(5):402-405.
[14] 张岱, 刘朝晖. 生殖道支原体感染诊治专家共识 [J]. 中国性科学, 2016, 25(3):80-82.
[15] 孙颖浩. 吴阶平泌尿外科学[M]. 北京: 人民卫生出版社, 2019.
[16] 顾伟鸣, 杨阳, 吴磊, 等. 实时荧光核酸恒温扩增技术检测泌尿生殖道沙眼衣原体感染 [J]. 临床检验杂志, 2010, 28(4):271-272.
[17] 骆振刚, 李瑞鹏, 王彦彬, 等. 实时荧光核酸恒温扩增技术检测泌尿生殖道生殖支原体感染临床观察 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2019, 25(6):535-538.
[18] 冯强, 马志伟, 王寓, 等. 男性不育症患者生殖支原体感染与精液常规参数及精子DNA完整性的相关性 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2020, 26(10):900-905.
[19] 李维娜, 朱文兵, 刘刚. 生殖支原体感染与男性不育相关性分析 [J]. 中华男科学杂志, 2018, 24(11):999-1004.
[20] 宣岩, 魏兰馨, 洪翔, 等. 我国不同人群生殖支原体感染率的Meta分析 [J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2021, 42(2):335-342.
[1] 振华 刘,建伟 王,广林 黄,贵忠 李,立波 满. [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(5): 943-947.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!