Acrosome reaction in Chlamydia-positive and negative patients.

Chlamydia trachomatis infections might have a detrimental effect on various sperm functions. Data concerning the effect of C. trachomatis on the capacitation activity of sperms are lacking. The study was undertaken to evaluate whether chlamydial infection influences acromsome reaction (AR). Three groups of men were investigated for ARs -Chlamydia negative (n = 46) and positive (n = 30) patients, and healthy men (n = 53) undergoing vasectomy. The fluorescence technique for the evaluation of AR was applied. The normal range for the induction of AR was assumed DeltaAR > 12.5% for this technique. Seminal plasma was examined for IgA antibodies against C. trachomatis. There was a significant difference in AR between healthy volunteers, Chlamydia-negative and Chlamydia-positive patients. DeltaARs were 15.8 +/- 1.6% in healthy volunteers versus 12.15 +/- 2.4% in Chlamydia-negative and 9.08 +/- 1.8% in Chlamydia-postive patients, respectively (P < 0.05). Significant elevated titres of C. trachomatis-specific IgA in seminal plasma showed a negative correlation with the AR of spermatozoa. AR seems to be a valuable marker, especially in couples with idiopathic infertility.

[Clinical evaluation of the blood glucose monitors Accutrend, Companion 2, Glucometer 3 and One Touch II in comparison with the glucose oxidase reference method]. / Klinische Beurteilung der Blutzuckermessgeräte Accutrend, Companion 2, Glucometer 3 und One Touch II im Vergleich mit der Referenzmethode Glukoseoxidase.

New small, light-weight and fast-acting meters for measuring blood glucose have been developed recently. To determine their accuracy and precision we compared Accutrend, Companion 2, Glucometer 3 and One Touch II with the reference glucose oxidase method. For determination of accuracy 150 measurements were performed on two meters of each brand, together with measurement on the Beckman 2 Analyzer, which served as our reference. Capillary blood samples were obtained from patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes attending our outpatient clinic. All measurements were performed by one experienced technician. Precision in series was determined by 15 measurements of venous EDTA samples. The coefficient of variance was used for statistical analysis. Accuracy was evaluated according to recommendations of the American Diabetes Association and clinically useful criteria such as the error grid analysis. We found that One Touch II performed best overall, followed by Accutrend. Companion 2 and Glucometer 3 showed higher deviations in both accuracy and precision, but nonetheless met the clinical criteria of accuracy and reliability measured by error grid analysis in 87% and 90.5% of measurements, respectively. In conclusion, all four blood glucose meters can safely be used, after proper training, by patients and medical staff for self-measurement of blood glucose.