Comparison of Automated Treponemal and Nontreponemal Test Algorithms as First-Line Syphilis Screening Assays

Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis diagnosis. This study compared the results of the traditional syphilis screening algorithm and a reverse algorithm using automated Mediace RPR or Me...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAnnals of laboratory medicine Vol. 36; no. 1; pp. 23 - 27
Main Authors Huh, Hee Jin, Chung, Jae-Woo, Park, Seong Yeon, Chae, Seok Lae
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Korea (South) The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine 01.01.2016
대한진단검사의학회
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
Abstract Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis diagnosis. This study compared the results of the traditional syphilis screening algorithm and a reverse algorithm using automated Mediace RPR or Mediace TPLA as first-line screening assays in subjects undergoing a health checkup. Samples from 24,681 persons were included in this study. We routinely performed Mediace RPR and Mediace TPLA simultaneously. Results were analyzed according to both the traditional algorithm and reverse algorithm. Samples with discordant results on the reverse algorithm (e.g., positive Mediace TPLA, negative Mediace RPR) were tested with Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA). Among the 24,681 samples, 30 (0.1%) were found positive by traditional screening, and 190 (0.8%) by reverse screening. The identified syphilis rate and overall false-positive rate according to the traditional algorithm were lower than those according to the reverse algorithm (0.07% and 0.05% vs. 0.64% and 0.13%, respectively). A total of 173 discordant samples were tested with TPPA by using the reverse algorithm, of which 140 (80.9%) were TPPA positive. Despite the increased false-positive results in populations with a low prevalence of syphilis, the reverse algorithm detected 140 samples with treponemal antibody that went undetected by the traditional algorithm. The reverse algorithm using Mediace TPLA as a screening test is more sensitive for the detection of syphilis.
AbstractList Background: Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis diagnosis. This study compared the results of the traditional syphilis screening algorithm and a reverse algorithm using automated Mediace RPR or Mediace TPLA as first-line screening assays in subjects undergoing a health checkup. Methods: Samples from 24,681 persons were included in this study. We routinely performed Mediace RPR and Mediace TPLA simultaneously. Results were analyzed according to both the traditional algorithm and reverse algorithm. Samples with discordant results on the reverse algorithm (e.g., positive Mediace TPLA, negative Mediace RPR) were tested with Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA). Results: Among the 24,681 samples, 30 (0.1%) were found positive by traditional screening, and 190 (0.8%) by reverse screening. The identified syphilis rate and overall false-positive rate according to the traditional algorithm were lower than those according to the reverse algorithm (0.07% and 0.05% vs. 0.64% and 0.13%, respectively). A total of 173 discordant samples were tested with TPPA by using the reverse algorithm, of which 140 (80.9%) were TPPA positive. Conclusions: Despite the increased false-positive results in populations with a low prevalence of syphilis, the reverse algorithm detected 140 samples with treponemal antibody that went undetected by the traditional algorithm. The reverse algorithm using Mediace TPLA as a screening test is more sensitive for the detection of syphilis. KCI Citation Count: 13
Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis diagnosis. This study compared the results of the traditional syphilis screening algorithm and a reverse algorithm using automated Mediace RPR or Mediace TPLA as first-line screening assays in subjects undergoing a health checkup.BACKGROUNDAutomated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis diagnosis. This study compared the results of the traditional syphilis screening algorithm and a reverse algorithm using automated Mediace RPR or Mediace TPLA as first-line screening assays in subjects undergoing a health checkup.Samples from 24,681 persons were included in this study. We routinely performed Mediace RPR and Mediace TPLA simultaneously. Results were analyzed according to both the traditional algorithm and reverse algorithm. Samples with discordant results on the reverse algorithm (e.g., positive Mediace TPLA, negative Mediace RPR) were tested with Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA).METHODSSamples from 24,681 persons were included in this study. We routinely performed Mediace RPR and Mediace TPLA simultaneously. Results were analyzed according to both the traditional algorithm and reverse algorithm. Samples with discordant results on the reverse algorithm (e.g., positive Mediace TPLA, negative Mediace RPR) were tested with Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA).Among the 24,681 samples, 30 (0.1%) were found positive by traditional screening, and 190 (0.8%) by reverse screening. The identified syphilis rate and overall false-positive rate according to the traditional algorithm were lower than those according to the reverse algorithm (0.07% and 0.05% vs. 0.64% and 0.13%, respectively). A total of 173 discordant samples were tested with TPPA by using the reverse algorithm, of which 140 (80.9%) were TPPA positive.RESULTSAmong the 24,681 samples, 30 (0.1%) were found positive by traditional screening, and 190 (0.8%) by reverse screening. The identified syphilis rate and overall false-positive rate according to the traditional algorithm were lower than those according to the reverse algorithm (0.07% and 0.05% vs. 0.64% and 0.13%, respectively). A total of 173 discordant samples were tested with TPPA by using the reverse algorithm, of which 140 (80.9%) were TPPA positive.Despite the increased false-positive results in populations with a low prevalence of syphilis, the reverse algorithm detected 140 samples with treponemal antibody that went undetected by the traditional algorithm. The reverse algorithm using Mediace TPLA as a screening test is more sensitive for the detection of syphilis.CONCLUSIONSDespite the increased false-positive results in populations with a low prevalence of syphilis, the reverse algorithm detected 140 samples with treponemal antibody that went undetected by the traditional algorithm. The reverse algorithm using Mediace TPLA as a screening test is more sensitive for the detection of syphilis.
Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis diagnosis. This study compared the results of the traditional syphilis screening algorithm and a reverse algorithm using automated Mediace RPR or Mediace TPLA as first-line screening assays in subjects undergoing a health checkup. Samples from 24,681 persons were included in this study. We routinely performed Mediace RPR and Mediace TPLA simultaneously. Results were analyzed according to both the traditional algorithm and reverse algorithm. Samples with discordant results on the reverse algorithm (e.g., positive Mediace TPLA, negative Mediace RPR) were tested with Treponema pallidum particle agglutination (TPPA). Among the 24,681 samples, 30 (0.1%) were found positive by traditional screening, and 190 (0.8%) by reverse screening. The identified syphilis rate and overall false-positive rate according to the traditional algorithm were lower than those according to the reverse algorithm (0.07% and 0.05% vs. 0.64% and 0.13%, respectively). A total of 173 discordant samples were tested with TPPA by using the reverse algorithm, of which 140 (80.9%) were TPPA positive. Despite the increased false-positive results in populations with a low prevalence of syphilis, the reverse algorithm detected 140 samples with treponemal antibody that went undetected by the traditional algorithm. The reverse algorithm using Mediace TPLA as a screening test is more sensitive for the detection of syphilis.
Author Chae, Seok Lae
Chung, Jae-Woo
Huh, Hee Jin
Park, Seong Yeon
AuthorAffiliation 2 Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
1 Department of Laboratory Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
AuthorAffiliation_xml – name: 2 Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
– name: 1 Department of Laboratory Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
Author_xml – sequence: 1
  givenname: Hee Jin
  surname: Huh
  fullname: Huh, Hee Jin
  organization: Department of Laboratory Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
– sequence: 2
  givenname: Jae-Woo
  surname: Chung
  fullname: Chung, Jae-Woo
  organization: Department of Laboratory Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
– sequence: 3
  givenname: Seong Yeon
  surname: Park
  fullname: Park, Seong Yeon
  organization: Department of Internal Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
– sequence: 4
  givenname: Seok Lae
  surname: Chae
  fullname: Chae, Seok Lae
  organization: Department of Laboratory Medicine, Dongguk University Ilsan Hospital, Goyang, Korea
BackLink https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26522755$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed
https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002058141$$DAccess content in National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
BookMark eNp1kc1v3CAQxVGVqvlo7j1VHHuxCwzG9qWStUraSKtEarZnhDHepcHggrfS_vf1ZtNNE6lcBjG_N0_MO0cnPniD0AdKcgAOn5UbckaoyEHkNGfwBp0xBjyDivKT452IU3SZ0k8yH0Eoq8k7dMpEwVhZFGfILcIwqmhT8Dj0uNlOYVCT6fAqmnH2G5TDynf4Nvjp-WVl0oQbtw7RTpshYZXwtY1pypbWG3y_GzfW2YTvdTTGW7_GTUpql96jt71yyVw-1Qv04_pqtfiWLe--3iyaZaZ5XUxZC60ohdacCqGJJlACq6qCgmGVAdK1irNS8dKAMaXWBS1MQXgn-rbTAioFF-jTYa6PvXzQVgZlH-s6yIcom--rG0k5IzWf0S8HdNy2g-m0mb-pnByjHVTcPQpfdrzdzGN-Sy7qEqB-9hpj-LWd9yIHm7RxTnkTtknSktVQMCB7r4__eh1N_qYxA-QA6BhSiqY_IpTIfeZyzlzuM5cgJJUMZol4JdF2UpPdx6Ws-7_wDx02soU
CitedBy_id crossref_primary_10_1128_JCM_01003_18
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_clinbiochem_2018_09_013
crossref_primary_10_1099_jmm_0_000886
crossref_primary_10_18663_tjcl_1445369
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_diagmicrobio_2020_115081
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_plabm_2017_04_007
crossref_primary_10_7883_yoken_JJID_2021_164
crossref_primary_10_1099_jmm_0_000559
crossref_primary_10_1371_journal_pone_0212893
crossref_primary_10_1136_sextrans_2020_054437
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_cca_2018_10_038
crossref_primary_10_1136_sextrans_2023_055973
crossref_primary_10_1093_labmed_lmad078
crossref_primary_10_25208_0042_4609_2016_92_3_69_74
crossref_primary_10_1038_s41372_019_0387_9
crossref_primary_10_1093_cid_ciy198
crossref_primary_10_1177_0033354920967302
crossref_primary_10_5858_2016_0110_CP
crossref_primary_10_1016_j_ijid_2018_12_016
crossref_primary_10_1128_JCM_02544_15
crossref_primary_10_17945_kjbt_2017_28_3_225
Cites_doi 10.1097/QCO.0b013e32834e9a3c
10.1002/jcla.20268
10.3343/kjlm.2008.28.3.207
10.1093/cid/ciu087
10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003347
10.1258/ijsa.2008.008510
10.3343/lmo.2014.4.1.36
10.1136/sti.79.4.323
10.1128/JCM.00078-15
10.1128/JCM.05636-11
10.3343/kjlm.2008.28.4.312
10.1128/JCM.06286-11
10.1093/infdis/jir524
10.1128/JCM.06347-11
10.3343/kjlm.2009.29.4.331
ContentType Journal Article
Copyright The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine. 2016
Copyright_xml – notice: The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine. 2016
DBID AAYXX
CITATION
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECM
EIF
NPM
7X8
5PM
ACYCR
DOI 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23
DatabaseName CrossRef
Medline
MEDLINE
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE
MEDLINE
PubMed
MEDLINE - Academic
PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)
Korean Citation Index
DatabaseTitle CrossRef
MEDLINE
Medline Complete
MEDLINE with Full Text
PubMed
MEDLINE (Ovid)
MEDLINE - Academic
DatabaseTitleList
MEDLINE - Academic
MEDLINE
Database_xml – sequence: 1
  dbid: NPM
  name: PubMed
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed
  sourceTypes: Index Database
– sequence: 2
  dbid: EIF
  name: MEDLINE
  url: https://proxy.k.utb.cz/login?url=https://www.webofscience.com/wos/medline/basic-search
  sourceTypes: Index Database
DeliveryMethod fulltext_linktorsrc
Discipline Medicine
EISSN 2234-3814
EndPage 27
ExternalDocumentID oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_142094
PMC4697339
26522755
10_3343_alm_2016_36_1_23
Genre Journal Article
Comparative Study
GroupedDBID ---
5-W
53G
8JR
8XY
9ZL
AAYXX
ACYCR
ADBBV
ADRAZ
AENEX
ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS
AOIJS
BAWUL
CITATION
C~G
DIK
DYU
EF.
GX1
HYE
KQ8
M48
PGMZT
RPM
CGR
CUY
CVF
ECGQY
ECM
EIF
EMOBN
NPM
7X8
5PM
M~E
OK1
OZF
ID FETCH-LOGICAL-c495t-b3b676cc4166c0c0373288513e28e30dba427a47e3ee7cc515e504d6fbdc638a3
IEDL.DBID M48
ISSN 2234-3806
2234-3814
IngestDate Tue Nov 21 21:41:27 EST 2023
Thu Aug 21 18:31:48 EDT 2025
Fri Jul 11 08:50:30 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 03 07:05:49 EDT 2025
Tue Jul 01 03:11:32 EDT 2025
Thu Apr 24 23:06:35 EDT 2025
IsDoiOpenAccess true
IsOpenAccess true
IsPeerReviewed true
IsScholarly true
Issue 1
Keywords Reverse algorithm
Automated TPLA
Automated RPR
Syphilis screening algorithm
Syphilis
Language English
License This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
LinkModel DirectLink
MergedId FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c495t-b3b676cc4166c0c0373288513e28e30dba427a47e3ee7cc515e504d6fbdc638a3
Notes ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
G704-000327.2016.36.1.014
OpenAccessLink http://journals.scholarsportal.info/openUrl.xqy?doi=10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23
PMID 26522755
PQID 1729352304
PQPubID 23479
PageCount 5
ParticipantIDs nrf_kci_oai_kci_go_kr_ARTI_142094
pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_4697339
proquest_miscellaneous_1729352304
pubmed_primary_26522755
crossref_primary_10_3343_alm_2016_36_1_23
crossref_citationtrail_10_3343_alm_2016_36_1_23
ProviderPackageCode CITATION
AAYXX
PublicationCentury 2000
PublicationDate 2016-01-01
PublicationDateYYYYMMDD 2016-01-01
PublicationDate_xml – month: 01
  year: 2016
  text: 2016-01-01
  day: 01
PublicationDecade 2010
PublicationPlace Korea (South)
PublicationPlace_xml – name: Korea (South)
PublicationTitle Annals of laboratory medicine
PublicationTitleAlternate Ann Lab Med
PublicationYear 2016
Publisher The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine
대한진단검사의학회
Publisher_xml – name: The Korean Society for Laboratory Medicine
– name: 대한진단검사의학회
References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref3) 2011; 60
Huh (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref8) 2014; 4
Jost (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref19) 2013; 3
Noh (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref11) 2008; 28
Kim (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref12) 2009; 29
Park (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref17) 2011; 204
Song (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref7) 2008; 28
Huh (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref10) 2009; 16
Binnicker (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref2) 2012; 25
González (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref21) 2015; 53
French (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref5) 2009; 20
Marangoni (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref16) 2009; 23
Egglestone (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref4) 2000; 3
10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref6
Binnicker (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref13) 2012; 50
Loeffelholz (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref18) 2012; 50
Cho (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref15) 2003; 79
Workowski (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref1) 2010; 59
Lipinsky (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref14) 2012; 50
Watanabe (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref9) 2011; 59
Tong (10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref20) 2014; 58
21307823 - MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011 Feb 11;60(5):133-7
22090407 - J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jan;50(1):148-50
25609729 - J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Apr;53(4):1361-4
24550376 - Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Apr;58(8):1116-24
11014025 - Commun Dis Public Health. 2000 Sep;3(3):158-62
24056483 - BMJ Open. 2013 Sep 19;3(9):e003347
19386965 - Int J STD AIDS. 2009 May;20(5):300-9
19140205 - J Clin Lab Anal. 2009;23(1):1-6
18728382 - Korean J Lab Med. 2008 Aug;28(4):312-8
12902586 - Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Aug;79(4):323-4
22156894 - Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2012 Feb;25(1):79-85
18594173 - Korean J Lab Med. 2008 Jun;28(3):207-13
19726896 - Korean J Lab Med. 2009 Aug;29(4):331-7
21930610 - J Infect Dis. 2011 Nov;204(9):1297-304
21476292 - Rinsho Byori. 2011 Feb;59(2):115-20
22090405 - J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jan;50(1):2-6
22259212 - J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Apr;50(4):1501
21160459 - MMWR Recomm Rep. 2010 Dec 17;59(RR-12):1-110
References_xml – volume: 25
  start-page: 79
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref2
  publication-title: Curr Opin Infect Dis
  doi: 10.1097/QCO.0b013e32834e9a3c
– volume: 23
  start-page: 1
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref16
  publication-title: J Clin Lab Anal
  doi: 10.1002/jcla.20268
– volume: 28
  start-page: 207
  year: 2008
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref7
  publication-title: Korean J Lab Med
  doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2008.28.3.207
– volume: 60
  start-page: 133
  year: 2011
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref3
  publication-title: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep
– volume: 58
  start-page: 1116
  year: 2014
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref20
  publication-title: Clin Infect Dis
  doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu087
– volume: 3
  start-page: e003347
  year: 2013
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref19
  publication-title: BMJ Open
  doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003347
– volume: 20
  start-page: 300
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref5
  publication-title: Int J STD AIDS
  doi: 10.1258/ijsa.2008.008510
– volume: 4
  start-page: 36
  year: 2014
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref8
  publication-title: Lab Med Online
  doi: 10.3343/lmo.2014.4.1.36
– volume: 59
  start-page: 115
  year: 2011
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref9
  publication-title: Rinsho Byori
– volume: 79
  start-page: 323
  year: 2003
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref15
  publication-title: Sex Transm Infect
  doi: 10.1136/sti.79.4.323
– volume: 53
  start-page: 1361
  year: 2015
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref21
  publication-title: J Clin Microbiol
  doi: 10.1128/JCM.00078-15
– volume: 50
  start-page: 148
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref13
  publication-title: J Clin Microbiol
  doi: 10.1128/JCM.05636-11
– volume: 28
  start-page: 312
  year: 2008
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref11
  publication-title: Korean J Lab Med
  doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2008.28.4.312
– ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref6
– volume: 59
  start-page: 1
  volume-title: Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), Recommendations and reports
  year: 2010
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref1
– volume: 3
  start-page: 158
  year: 2000
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref4
  publication-title: Commun Dis Public Health
– volume: 50
  start-page: 1501
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref14
  publication-title: J Clin Microbiol
  doi: 10.1128/JCM.06286-11
– volume: 204
  start-page: 1297
  year: 2011
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref17
  publication-title: J Infect Dis
  doi: 10.1093/infdis/jir524
– volume: 50
  start-page: 2
  year: 2012
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref18
  publication-title: J Clin Microbiol
  doi: 10.1128/JCM.06347-11
– volume: 16
  start-page: 236
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref10
  publication-title: Dongguk J Med
– volume: 29
  start-page: 331
  year: 2009
  ident: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.1.23_ref12
  publication-title: Korean J Lab Med
  doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2009.29.4.331
– reference: 24550376 - Clin Infect Dis. 2014 Apr;58(8):1116-24
– reference: 12902586 - Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Aug;79(4):323-4
– reference: 19140205 - J Clin Lab Anal. 2009;23(1):1-6
– reference: 24056483 - BMJ Open. 2013 Sep 19;3(9):e003347
– reference: 21307823 - MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2011 Feb 11;60(5):133-7
– reference: 11014025 - Commun Dis Public Health. 2000 Sep;3(3):158-62
– reference: 22090407 - J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jan;50(1):148-50
– reference: 22090405 - J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Jan;50(1):2-6
– reference: 21930610 - J Infect Dis. 2011 Nov;204(9):1297-304
– reference: 25609729 - J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Apr;53(4):1361-4
– reference: 21476292 - Rinsho Byori. 2011 Feb;59(2):115-20
– reference: 18594173 - Korean J Lab Med. 2008 Jun;28(3):207-13
– reference: 18728382 - Korean J Lab Med. 2008 Aug;28(4):312-8
– reference: 21160459 - MMWR Recomm Rep. 2010 Dec 17;59(RR-12):1-110
– reference: 22259212 - J Clin Microbiol. 2012 Apr;50(4):1501
– reference: 19386965 - Int J STD AIDS. 2009 May;20(5):300-9
– reference: 19726896 - Korean J Lab Med. 2009 Aug;29(4):331-7
– reference: 22156894 - Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2012 Feb;25(1):79-85
SSID ssj0000601290
Score 2.1504607
Snippet Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for syphilis...
Background: Automated Mediace Treponema pallidum latex agglutination (TPLA) and Mediace rapid plasma reagin (RPR) assays are used by many laboratories for...
SourceID nrf
pubmedcentral
proquest
pubmed
crossref
SourceType Open Website
Open Access Repository
Aggregation Database
Index Database
Enrichment Source
StartPage 23
SubjectTerms Algorithms
Anti-Bacterial Agents - therapeutic use
Humans
Latex Fixation Tests
Original
Reagins - blood
Syphilis - diagnosis
Syphilis - drug therapy
Syphilis - microbiology
Treponema pallidum - isolation & purification
병리학
Title Comparison of Automated Treponemal and Nontreponemal Test Algorithms as First-Line Syphilis Screening Assays
URI https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26522755
https://www.proquest.com/docview/1729352304
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC4697339
https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002058141
Volume 36
hasFullText 1
inHoldings 1
isFullTextHit
isPrint
ispartofPNX Annals of Laboratory Medicine, 2016, 36(1), , pp.23-27
link http://utb.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwfZ3bb9MwFMYtOiTEC-JOuUxG4oWHdEmd2M0DQmhiDKTyRKW-WbbjbNWyZCSpRP97vpOkpUOFp0iJHSc-vvw-X44ZexeaPBUOhdenoQ_iyM8CC7IPEmlVDkBNkm414fy7PF_E35bJ8s_26CEDm4PSjs6TWtTF5NfPzUdU-A-kOEUsTkxBW8ojORFyAsknRuwu-iVF1XQ-wH7fLneDLv1c5cGI5BlYAkgUbfzb66ZGZZ0fItC_F1Lu9UxnD9mDASn5p74MPGJ3fPmY3ZsPk-ZPWHG6O2uQVzk367YCpvqMk0fLqvTXiGzKjJdVuXcHCNpyU1xU9aq9vG64aXi-AioGxKW82dzQSEzD0epACaP_Q4DGbJqnbHH2-cfpeTAcshA4aKM2sMJKJZ0DmEkXulCQ9x5gmPDTmRdhZk08VSZWXnivnAP--CSMM5nbzKHuGvGMHeH7_AvGQWN5ZNFqQfbGIjep9DJNM6EycMDMxmN2ss1T7QYP5HQQRqGhRMggGgbRZBAtpI70VIzZ-12Mm977xn_CvoWZ9JVbaXKZTdeLSl_VGsLgKxTOFEIWYbZG1KhGNDdiSl-tGw2OS0U3Qj5mz3uj7lLclokxU7fMvQtA6d1-Uq4uO1fdsUyRG-nLf77zFbtPP9EP6rxmR2299m-AOa09ZqMvy-i4K8O_AQmu-60
linkProvider Scholars Portal
openUrl ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison+of+automated+treponemal+and+nontreponemal+test+algorithms+as+first-line+syphilis+screening+assays&rft.jtitle=Annals+of+laboratory+medicine&rft.au=Huh%2C+Hee+Jin&rft.au=Chung%2C+Jae+Woo&rft.au=Park%2C+Seong+Yeon&rft.au=Chae%2C+Seok+Lae&rft.date=2016-01-01&rft.eissn=2234-3814&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=23&rft_id=info:doi/10.3343%2Falm.2016.36.1.23&rft_id=info%3Apmid%2F26522755&rft.externalDocID=26522755
thumbnail_l http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=2234-3806&client=summon
thumbnail_m http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=2234-3806&client=summon
thumbnail_s http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=2234-3806&client=summon