Investigation on Biovars and Serotypes of Ureaplasma Urealyticum in Cervix in Chinese Gynecologic Check-up Population, Sexually Transmitted Infections Clinic Clients and Sex Workers

Objectives: To characterize the distribution pattern biovars and serotypes of Ureaplasma urealyticum in normahealthy women, sexually transmitted infections clinic clienand in sex workers. Methods: We cultured cervical swabs taken from 26physical check-up clients, 599 STI clinic outpatients and 9sex workers using commercial selective medium. Sompositive cultures were further biotyped and serotyped bPCR. Results: (1) Biovar 1 of U urealyticum (95.0%), especiallsingle infection of serotype 1, 3, and 6 of biovar 1,commonly found in healthy women. (2) U urealyticummore commonly isolated in sex workers (90.8%) than iphysical check-up group (60.9%) and STI outpatients grou(61.3%) (P<0.001). (3) Biovar 2 infection of U urealyticuris more prevalent in sex workers (28.1%) and SToutpatients group (26.6%) than that in physical check-ugroup (4.9%) (P<0.001). (4) Mixed infection caused bmore than one serotype of U. urealyticum is increasing fromphysical check-up group (8.6%) to STI outpatients (12.4%and to sex wokers (23.9%) (P<0.01). (5) There is nstatistic difference in the distribution of serotype 1, 3, and of biovar 1 among these three groups (P=0.763). (6) ThPCR method described here is relatively simple, rapid anspecific for the biotyping and serotyping of biovar 1 of Uurealyticum. Conclusion: we should pay more attention to biovarand mixed infection than single infection of biovar 1 of Uurealyticum in clinic practice. PCR is a good method ibiotyping and serotyping.

Biovars and Serotypes of Ureaplasma Urealyticum among Chinese Women Undergoing Routine Gynecologic Exam, Women with Sexually Transmitted Infections, and Female Sex Workers

Objectives: To characterize the distribution pattern of biovars and scrotypes or Ureaplasma urealyyicum in normalhealthy women, sexually transmitted infections clinic clients,and in sex workers. Methods: We cultured cervical swabs taken from 261physical check-up clients, 599 STI clinic outpatients and 98 sexworkers using commercial selective medium. Some positivecultures were further biotyped and serotyped by PCR. Results: (1) U. urealyticum is more commonly isolated in sexworkers (90.8%) than in the physical check-up group (60.9%)or the STI outpatient group (61.3%) (P<0.001). (2) Biovar 1of U. 'realyticum (95.0%), especially single infection ofserotype 1. 3, and 6 of biovar 1, is commonly found in healthywomen. (3) Biovar 2 infection of U urealyticum is moreprevalent in sex workers (28.1%) and STI outpatients group(26.6%) than that in the physical check-up group (4.9%) (P<0.001). (4) Mixed infection caused by more than one serotypeof U urealyticum increased from physical check-up group(8.6%) to STI utpatients (12.4%) to sex workers (23.9%) (P<0.01). (5) There is no statistically significant difference in thedistribution of serotype 1, 3, and 6 of biovar 1 among thesethree groups (P=0.763). (6) The PCR method described here isrelatively simple, rapid and specific for the biotyping andserotyping of biovar 1 of U urealyticum. Conclusion: We should pay more attention to biovar 2 andmixed infections of U. urealyticum than single infection ofhiovar 1 in clinic practice. PCR is a good method for biotypingand serotvping.