Skip to main content
Log in

Prevalence of chlamydial antibody in pregnancy

A matched-pair study

  • Published:
European Journal of Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this matched-pair study 139 pregnant women were matched on the basis of age to an equal number of non-pregnant women with no signs of genital infection. The mean age was 28.7 years (range 20–41). The cut-offs used for detection of chlamydial antibody were 1:64 and 1:128 for IgG and 1:16 for IgA. IgG antibody at 64 was detected in 37.4% of pregnant women, compared to 46% of controls (p=0.145). There was, however, a statistically significant difference between the groups for IgG at 128 (gravidae=15.8%; controls=28%;p=0.014). IgA were detected in 8.6% and 16.5% of subjects, respectively (p=0.047). IgG levels did not vary with increasing age among the pregnant women, but rose significantly with age in non-pregnant controls (logistic regressionp-values=0.011 and 0.006, for IgG at 64 and 128, respectively). IgG-positive women in the control group tended to be older than pregnant IgG-positive women (p=0.06). These differences could not be explained by marital status, parity or use of oral contraceptives. In view of the lack of epidemiological differences, biological explanations might be invoked.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Francois OP, Rouhan D, Hirtz P, Beaudoing A.Chlamydia trachomatis en pediatrie. Pediatrie 1988; 43: 101–108.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Preece PM, Anderson JM, Thompson RG.Chlamydia trachomatis infection in infants: A prospective study. Arch Dis Child 1989; 64: 525–529.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dannevig L, Schive B, Straume BK, Melby K. Perinatal transmission ofChlamydia trachomatis. The use of serological tests in detecting infective women. Infection 1991; 19: 135–137.

    Google Scholar 

  4. McGregor JA, French JL.Chlamydia trachomatis infection during pregnancy. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 164: 1782–1789.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Schachter J, Grossman M.Chlamydia. In: Remington J, Klein J, eds. Infectious diseases of the fetus and newborn infants. Semin Perinatol 1983; 9: 29–37.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ridgway GL. The laboratory diagnosis of chlamydial infection. In: Oriel D, Ridgway D, Schachter J, Taylor-Robinson D, Ward M, eds. Chlamydial infections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988: 533–549.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hammerschlag MR, Cummings C, Roblin PM, Williams TH, Delke I. Efficacy of neonatal ocular prophylaxis for the prevention of chlamydial and gonococcal conjunctivitis. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 769–772.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ripa T. Epidemiologic control of genitalChlamydia trachomatis infections. Scand J Infect Dis 1990; 69 (suppl): 157–167.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Nettleman MD, Jones RB, Roberts SD, Dittus RS. Cost-effectiveness of serology and cell culture forChlamydia trachomatis in low prevalence women. In: Oriel D, Ridgway D, Schachter J, Taylor-Robinson D, Ward M, eds. Chlamydial infections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983: 204–208.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Schachter J, Grossman M, Sweet RL, Holt J, Jordan C, Bishop E. Prospective study of perinatal transmission ofChlamydia trachomatis. JAMA 1986; 255: 3374–3377.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bollani L, Belloni C, Gorini G, Milano F, Gerola O. Infezioni neonatali daChlamydia trachomatis. 3rd National Congress Gruppo di Lavoro di Neonatologia della Società Italiana di Pediatria, Stresa, 20 May–2 June 1989.

  12. Nettleman MD, Bell TA. Cost-effectiveness of prenatal testing forChlamydia trachomatis. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1991; 164: 1289–1294.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Preece PM, Ades A, Thompson RG, Brooks JH.Chlamydia trachomatis infection in late pregnancy: A prospective study. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1989; 3: 268–277.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Legris M, Hainaut F, Crimail P, Catalan F. Resultats du depistage et traitement precocé des infections àChlamydia trachomatis au course de la grossesse. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod 1989; 18: 581–585.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Trachtenberg Al, Washington AE, Halldorson S. A cost-based decision analysis forChlamydia screening in California family planning clinics. Obstet Gynecol 1988; 71: 101–108.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Humphreys JT, Henneberry JF, Rickard RS, Beebe JL. Cost-benefit analysis of selective screening criteria forChlamydia trachomatis infection in women attending Colorado family planning clinics. Sex Transm Dis 1992; 19: 47–53.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Brasfield DM, Stagno S, Whitley RJ, Cloud G, Cassell G, Tiller RE. Infant pneumonitis associated with cytomegalovirus,Chlamydia, Pneumocystis and Ureaplasma: follow-up. Pediatrics 1987; 79: 76–83.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Olliaro, P., Regazzetti, A., Marchetti, A.L. et al. Prevalence of chlamydial antibody in pregnancy. Eur J Epidemiol 10, 47–50 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01717451

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01717451

Key words

Navigation