Abstract

Letters 145 2 Smith TF. Chlamydia. In Schmidt it is not to NJ, Emmons RW Fortunately necessary under- (eds.), Diagnostic procedures for viral, rickettsial and stand this in order to conclude process which chlamydial infections, 6th Edn. Washington: American Public Health Association, 1989. criteria of cost effec- age groups satisfy existing 3 Thejls H, Gnarpe J, Gnarpe H, et al. Expanded gold stan- tiveness. However, better definition will be dard in the diagnosis of Chlamydia trachomatis in a low prevalence population: diagnostic efficacy of tissue cul- required to evaluate change over time. ture, direct immunofluorescence, enzyme immunoassay, five out of Disappointingly, only the 40 pos- PCR and serology. Genitourin Med 1994;70:300-3. 4 Lee HH, Chernesky MA, Schachter J, et al. of itive patients were referred to the local Diagnosis depart- Chlamydia trachomatis infection genito-urinary in women ments of genitourinary medicine. No other chain by ligase reaction assay of urine. Lancet 1995; 345:213-6. patients with positive results were found to 5 Palmer HM, Gilroy CB, Thomas BJ, Hay PE, Gilchrist C, have attended the local clinic in the rural area Taylor-Robinson D. Detection of Chlamydia trachomatis by the polymerase chain reaction in swabs and urine but in contrast the of