Literature DB >> 12199851

Detection of toxin production in Clostridium difficile strains by three different methods.

M Yücesoy1, J McCoubrey, R Brown, I R Poxton.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To compare two immunoassays for detection of toxins produced in vitro by isolates of Clostridium difficile with the standard tissue culture assay, to help in the diagnosis of C. difficile-associated diarrhoea.
METHODS: Toxin production was investigated in 42 strains of C. difficile of various serotypes, ribotypes and S-protein types. These included strains from our laboratory collection, strains freshly isolated from stool specimens of patients suspected of suffering from C. difficile-associated disease or of carrying it asymptomatically, and one reference strain (NCTC 11223). Toxin was assayed by (i) a rapid slide immunoassay (C. difficile toxin A test, Clearview, Oxoid), (ii) an enzyme-linked microplate immunoassay (C. difficile toxin A/B test, Techlab), and (iii) a tissue culture assay. The rapid slide assay and the enzyme immunoassay were performed according to the manufacturers' recommendations. The tissue culture assay was performed using Vero cells.
RESULTS: Thirty of the 42 strains (71%) were shown to be positive for toxin A by the slide immunoassay and 34 of the strains (81%) were found to be toxin A/B producers by the enzyme immunoassay. The same 34 strains that were positive in the enzyme immunoassay also produced toxin B (cytotoxin) in the tissue culture assay. The sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the rapid slide immunoassay method were calculated to be 88.2%, 100.0%, 100.0% and 66.7%, respectively, when compared to tissue culture assay results as the reference method. These values for the enzyme immunoassay method were all 100.0%. In this study eight strains were found to be non-toxin-producing by all methods. It is possible that there were four strains that only produced toxin B (A- B+), and were missed by the rapid A-only assay.
CONCLUSIONS: We can recommend the use of the Techlab A + B enzyme immunoassay for the detection of toxin production by C. difficile strains because of its high sensitivity and specificity, its ease of use, and its capability of detecting both A- and B-type toxins.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12199851     DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0691.2002.00440.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect        ISSN: 1198-743X            Impact factor:   8.067


  5 in total

1.  Detection of Clostridium difficile toxin: comparison of enzyme immunoassay results with results obtained by cytotoxicity assay.

Authors:  Daniel M Musher; Atisha Manhas; Pranav Jain; Franziska Nuila; Amna Waqar; Nancy Logan; Bernard Marino; Edward A Graviss
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-06-13       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Clostridium difficile colitis in solid organ transplantation--a single-center experience.

Authors:  I Stelzmueller; H Goegele; M Biebl; S Wiesmayr; N Berger; W Tabarelli; E Ruttmann; J Albright; R Margreiter; M Fille; H Bonatti
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2007-04-04       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  Comparison of the premier toxin A and B assay and the TOX A/B II assay for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Susan M Novak-Weekley; Michele H Hollingsworth
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2008-01-02

Review 4.  Clostridium difficile associated infection, diarrhea and colitis.

Authors:  Perry Hookman; Jamie S Barkin
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-04-07       Impact factor: 5.742

5.  Enterocolitis due to simultaneous infection with rotavirus and Clostridium difficile in adult and pediatric solid organ transplantation.

Authors:  Ingrid Stelzmueller; Silke Wiesmayr; Mirjam Eller; Manfred Fille; Cornelia Lass-Floerl; Guenther Weiss; Paul Hengster; Raimund Margreiter; Hugo Bonatti
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 3.452

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.