Cervicitis laboratory findings

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Cervicitis Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Cervicitis from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Screening

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Diagnosis

Diagnostic Study of Choice

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Laboratory Findings

Electrocardiogram

X Ray

Echocardiography and Ultrasound

CT

MRI

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Surgery

Primary Prevention

Secondary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Cervicitis laboratory findings On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

Images

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Cervicitis laboratory findings

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA on Cervicitis laboratory findings

CDC on Cervicitis laboratory findings

Cervicitis laboratory findings in the news

Blogs on Cervicitis laboratory findings

Directions to Hospitals Treating Cervicitis

Risk calculators and risk factors for Cervicitis laboratory findings

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1]; Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: Prince Tano Djan, BSc, MBChB [2]

Overview

Diagnosis of cervicitis is mostly clinical however, a finding of >10 WBC in vaginal fluid, in the absence of trichomoniasis, may indicate endocervical inflammation caused specifically by C. trachomatis or N. gonorrhea although culture is more accurate for gonococcal cervicitis.[1] The use of nucleic acid amplification tests is very helpful for the diagnosis of trichomoniasis.[2] Wet mount microscopy and direct visualisation have low sensitivity in detecting N. gonorrhea and T. vaginalis, because of this symptomatic women with cervicitis and negative microscopy should receive further testing (i.e., culture or other FDA-cleared method). Although HSV-2 infection has been associated with cervicitis, the utility of specific testing (i.e., culture or serologic testing) for HSV-2 is unknown. DNA amplification techniques has good sensitivity, but are not yet approved for diagnostic purposes of Trichomoniasis.[3] Microscopy (wet prep) and vaginal pH are useful for identifying bacterial vaginosis which may show clue cells.[4]

Laboratory Findings

Diagnosis of cervicitis is mostly clinical however, some laboratory findings consistent with cervicitis include :

  • The use of nucleic acid amplification tests for the diagnosis of trichomoniasis.[2]
  • Wet mount microscopy and direct visualisation have low sensitivity in detecting N. gonorrhea and T. vaginalis, because of this symptomatic women with cervicitis and negative microscopy should receive further testing (i.e., culture or other FDA-cleared method).
  • Although HSV-2 infection has been associated with cervicitis, the utility of specific testing (i.e., culture or serologic testing) for HSV-2 is unknown.
  • DNA amplification techniques has good sensitivity, but are not yet approved for diagnostic purposes of Trichomoniasis[3]
  • Microscopy (wet prep) and vaginal pH are useful for identifying bacterial vaginosis which may show clue cells.[4]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 McLellan R, Spence MR, Brockman M, Raffel L, Smith JL (1982). "The clinical diagnosis of trichomoniasis". Obstet Gynecol. 60 (1): 30–4. PMID 6896368.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Workowski KA, Bolan GA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2015). "Sexually transmitted diseases treatment guidelines, 2015". MMWR Recomm Rep. 64 (RR-03): 1–137. PMID 26042815.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Swygard H, Seña AC, Hobbs MM, Cohen MS (2004). "Trichomoniasis: clinical manifestations, diagnosis and management". Sex Transm Infect. 80 (2): 91–5. PMC 1744792. PMID 15054166.
  4. 4.0 4.1 Storti-Filho A, Souza PC, Souza RJ, Pereira MW, Mello IC, Svidizinski TI; et al. (2011). "Prevalence of clue cells suggestive for Gardnerella vaginalis in population-based cervical screening in the public versus private health care in Maringá, Paraná, Brazil". Arch Gynecol Obstet. 283 (4): 781–5. doi:10.1007/s00404-010-1400-x. PMID 20221621.


Template:WikiDoc Sources