Diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis during pregnancy.

J Low Genit Tract Dis

1Department of Tocogynecology, Lower Genital Tract Clinic, Hospital de Clínicas, University Hospital of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina; 2Department of Clinical Biochemistry, Clinical Bacteriology Laboratory, Faculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina; and 3Obstetrical Department, Hospital de Clínicas, University Hospital of Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Published: April 2003

OBJECTIVE.: To evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the score and each one of the clinical criteria (pH, potassium hydroxide (KOH) test for amines, and clue cells) in relation to the Amsel's method. MATERIALS AND METHODS.: One hundred ninety vaginal exudates from pregnant women were studied from April to August 1997. The patients were examined in the Lower Genital Tract and Colposcopy Clinics of the Obstetrics Division at the University Hospital de Clínicas at the University of Buenos Aires, Argentina.The diagnosis of bacterial vaginosis (BV) was made by the presence of three or more of the following criteria: homogeneous vaginal discharge, pH >/= 4.5, positive KOH test for amines, and microscopic presence of clue cells. We also used the microscopic observation of coccobacilli forms in Gram stain (Nugent's method), diagnosing BV with a score >/= 7. RESULTS.: Nugent's method showed a sensitivity of 97% and specificity of 98%. The presence of clue cells showed a sensitivity of 92% and specificity of 97%. The sensitivity of the pH and KOH test for amines was 87% and 81%, whereas the respective specificity was 45% and 99%. CONCLUSIONS.: Because Nugent's method showed a very good specificity and sensitivity, it can be used as another method in the diagnosis of BV. The presence of clue cells diagnosed BV with better sensitivity and specificity than the other clinical criteria. In this way, we recommend the microscopic exam by Gram stain, using Nugent's method or the presence of clue cells, for diagnosing BV.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/00128360-200304000-00008DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

clue cells
20
presence clue
16
nugent's method
16
koh test
12
test amines
12
diagnosis bacterial
8
bacterial vaginosis
8
sensitivity specificity
8
clinical criteria
8
gram stain
8

Similar Publications

Mandarin fish ranavirus (MRV) is a distinctive member among the genus of the family . The persistently covert infection of MRV was previously observed in a natural outbreak of MRV, but the underlying mechanism remains unclear. Here, we show that mandarin fish peripheral B lymphocytes are implemented as viral reservoirs to maintain the persistent infection.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Barrett's Esophagus (BE) is the only known precursor for esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). Patients with multiple risk factors for BE/EAC are recommended for screening; however, few eligible patients undergo evaluation by endoscopy. EsoGuard (EG) is a commercially available biomarker assay used to analyze esophageal cells collected non-endoscopically with EsoCheck (EC) for the qualitative detection of BE/EAC.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background And Purpose: F. nucleatum, a gram-negative oral bacteria, is abundant in laryngeal cancer (LC). While specific 14-3-3 proteins act as LC oncogenes, the link between F.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Imaging phenotype reveals that disulfirams induce protein insolubility in the mitochondrial matrix.

Sci Rep

December 2024

Center for Drug Discovery, Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Shizuoka, Suruga-ku, Shizuoka, 422-8526, Shizuoka, Japan.

The cell painting assay is useful for understanding cellular phenotypic changes and drug effects. To identify other aspects of well-known chemicals, we screened 258 compounds with the cell painting assay and focused on a mitochondrial punctate phenotype seen with disulfiram. To elucidate the reason for this punctate phenotype, we looked for clues by examining staining steps and gene knockdown as well as examining protein solubility and comparing cell lines.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis cannot be reliably differentiated from other forms of spongiotic/eczematous dermatitis by histology alone. Textbooks and recent studies have variably supported the specificity of dermal eosinophils, eosinophilic spongiosis, and Langerhans cell collections, among other features.

Objective: To assess which histopathologic features favor a diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!