Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details

Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (CCLM)

Published in Association with the European Federation of Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine (EFLM)

Editor-in-Chief: Plebani, Mario

Ed. by Gillery, Philippe / Lackner, Karl J. / Lippi, Giuseppe / Melichar, Bohuslav / Payne, Deborah A. / Schlattmann, Peter / Tate, Jillian R.


IMPACT FACTOR increased in 2015: 3.017
Rank 5 out of 30 in category Medical Laboratory Technology in the 2014 Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report/Science Edition

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2015: 0.873
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2015: 0.982
Impact per Publication (IPP) 2015: 2.238

249,00 € / $374.00 / £187.00*

Online
ISSN
1437-4331
See all formats and pricing

 


Select Volume and Issue
Loading journal volume and issue information...

30,00 € / $42.00 / £23.00

Get Access to Full Text

Evaluation of two automated chemiluminescence immunoassays, the LIAISON Treponema Screen and the ARCHITECT Syphilis TP, and the Treponema pallidum particle agglutination test for laboratory diagnosis of syphilis

1 / Hanna Dietenberger1

1Dr. Gaertner and Colleagues Laboratory, Ravensburg, Germany

Corresponding author: Nele Wellinghausen, MD, Dr. Gaertner and Kollegen Laboratory, Elisabethenstr. 11, D-88212 Ravensburg, Germany Phone: +49-751-502 220, Fax: +49-751-502 833

Citation Information: Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory Medicine. Volume 49, Issue 8, Pages 1375–1377, ISSN (Online) 1437-4331, ISSN (Print) 1434-6621, DOI: 10.1515/CCLM.2011.643, May 2011

Publication History

Received:
2011-03-08
Accepted:
2011-03-25
Published Online:
2011-05-28

Abstract

Background: Automated Treponema pallidum-specific chemi-luminescence immunoassays (CLIA) run on random-access analyzers allow for rapid diagnosis of syphilis infection.

Methods: We evaluated the LIAISON Treponema Screen (LIA) and the ARCHITECT Syphilis TP (ARCH) in comparison to the Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA) test, as a screening test for syphilis. We performed a prospective study using 577 sera submitted for diagnosis of syphilis, including 318 samples from pregnant women. In addition, 42 stored sera from 32 patients with clinically and serologically characterized syphilis infection were investigated.

Results: In the prospective study, the sensitivity and specificity of LIA, ARCH, and TPPA were 100% (18/18), 100% (17/17), and 100% (18/18), and 100% (558/558), 99.8% (552/553), and 99.6% (556/558), respectively. In pregnant women, the specificity of LIA and ARCH was 100% (317/317) and of TPPA 99.7% (316/317). One sample from a child with assumed exposure to maternal antitreponemal antibodies was omitted from analysis. LIA, ARCH, and TPPA were also positive in all investigated sera from patients with known syphilis.

Conclusions: Both automated CLIA demonstrated excellent diagnostic sensitivity and specificity when evaluated as a screening test for syphilis under routine conditions of a diagnostic laboratory. Thus, these may be used independently as an alternative to the manual TPPA screen.

Keywords: chemiluminescence immunoassays (CLIA); serology; syphilis; Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA)

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Linda Sommese, Chiara Sabia, Antonella Esposito, Carmela Iannone, Maria Lourdes Montesano, and Claudio Napoli
Infectious Diseases, 2016, Page 1
[2]
Man Xu, Yafeng Xie, Chuanhao Jiang, Yongjian Xiao, Xingxing Kuang, Feijun Zhao, Tiebing Zeng, Shuangquan Liu, Mingxing Liang, Li Li, Chuan Wang, and Yimou Wu
International Journal of Infectious Diseases, 2015
[3]
Ziad A. Memish, Malak Almasri, Aziz A. Chentoufi, Jaffar A. Al-Tawfiq, Ali M. Al-Shangiti, Kenan M. Al-Kabbani, Badriah Otaibi, Abdullah Assirri, and Saber Yezli
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 2015, Volume 42, Number 9, Page 526
[4]
S. Jonckheere, M. Berth, M. Van Esbroeck, S. Blomme, K. Lagrou, and E. Padalko
European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, 2015
[5]
Shuqin Dai, Peidong Chi, Yuehao Lin, Xin Zheng, Wen Liu, Jingping Zhang, Qiuyao Zeng, Xingping Wu, Wanli Liu, and Junye Wang
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 2014, Volume 41, Number 1, Page 29
[6]
Martin Enders, Andrea Hunjet, Michael Gleich, Roland Imdahl, Annelies Mühlbacher, Harald Schennach, Kriangsak Chaiwong, Tasanee Sakuldamrongpanich, Ajda Turhan, Rüchan Sertöz, Eva Wolf, Wolfgang Mayer, Chuanmin Tao, Lan Lan Wang, Simona Semprini, Vittorio Sambri, and T. S. Alexander
Clinical and Vaccine Immunology, 2015, Volume 22, Number 1, Page 17
[7]
Dorien Van den Bossche, Eric Florence, Christopher Kenyon, and Marjan Van Esbroeck
Sexually Transmitted Diseases, 2014, Volume 41, Number 11, Page 680
[8]
Xin-Min Nie, Rong Huang, Cai-Xia Dong, Li-Juan Tang, Rong Gui, and Jian-Hui Jiang
Biosensors and Bioelectronics, 2014, Volume 58, Page 314
[9]
Can Liu, Qishui Ou, Huijuan Chen, Jing Chen, Sheng Lin, Ling Jiang, and Bin Yang
Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis, 2014, Volume 28, Number 3, Page 204
[10]
Miguel Ángel Benítez Merelo, Alba Cebollero Agustí, and Begoña Gutiérrez Lobato
Revista del Laboratorio Clínico, 2013, Volume 6, Number 2, Page 82

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.