Objective: The aim: To investigate the utility of testing for chlamydial heat shock protein 60 (CHSP60) antibodies in the diagnosis of tubal infertility.
Patients and methods: Materials and methods: All the collected samples were assayed for IgM and IgG antibodies to chlamydia trachomatis and chlamydial heat shock protein 60 (CHSP60) by using immunofluorescence and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) techniques, respectively.
Results: Results: There were no substantial differences between antibodies to C. trachomatis in females with tubal infertility (67%) and non-tubal infertility (48%). However, women with tubal infertility (45%) have more anti-CHSP60 antibodies than non-tubal infertility (9%). Antibody screening for C. trachomatis has only (63%) sensitivity and (54%) specificity for detecting tubal infertility. On the other hand, the CHSP60 antibody testing has (44%) sensitivity and 92% specificity for diagnosing tubal infertility. A positive microimmunofluorescence (MIF) titer was observed in 12 of 18 (67%) females with the tubal problem, 31 of 64 (48%) with non-tubal infertility (P=0.3, OR=2.2, 95% CI=0.71 to 8.01). The CHSP60 antibodies were found in 8 of 18 (45%) females with tubal problem & 6 of 64 (9%) women with non-tubal infertility, power factor alpha α P=0.004, OR=9.3, 95% CI=2.1 to 43.2, power= 1.002 for n= 0.05). Incorporating CHSP60 and C. trachomatis antibodies testing gives an excellent positive probability proportion of 10 to diagnose C. trachomatis associated tubal infertility.
Conclusion: Conclusions: CHSP60 antibody testing is a more specific evaluation than antibody testing for C. trachomatis for predicting chlamydia-associated tubal infertility. Using these tests at the first infertility examination may help the immediate diagnosis for non-interceptive tubal infertility.
Keywords: Chlamydia trachomatis; antibodies; chlamydial heat shock protein (CHSP60); tubal infertility; tubal occlusion.