Literature DB >> 19955275

C. Diff Quik Chek complete enzyme immunoassay provides a reliable first-line method for detection of Clostridium difficile in stool specimens.

Criziel D Quinn1, Susan E Sefers, Wisal Babiker, Ying He, Romina Alcabasa, Charles W Stratton, Karen C Carroll, Yi-Wei Tang.   

Abstract

We evaluated a single membrane device assay for simultaneously detecting both Clostridium difficile glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B antigens against a standard that combines two PCR assays and cytotoxigenic culture. Results showing dual GDH and toxin A/B antigen positives and negatives can be reported immediately as true positives and negatives, respectively. Specimens with discrepant results for GDH and toxins A/B, which comprised 13.2% of the specimens, need to be retested.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2009        PMID： 19955275      PMCID： PMC2815622          DOI： 10.1128/JCM.01614-09

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN： 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  16 in total

1.  Comparative evaluation of three commercial systems for nucleic acid extraction from urine specimens.

Authors:  Yi-Wei Tang; Susan E Sefers; Haijing Li; Debra J Kohn; Gary W Procop
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2005-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Effective detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile by a two-step algorithm including tests for antigen and cytotoxin.

Authors:  John R Ticehurst; Deborah Z Aird; Lisa M Dam; Anita P Borek; John T Hargrove; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  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

4.  Evaluation of methods for detection of toxins in specimens of feces submitted for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea.

Authors:  D O'Connor; P Hynes; M Cormican; E Collins; G Corbett-Feeney; M Cassidy
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Multicenter evaluation of the Clostridium difficile TOX A/B TEST.

Authors:  D M Lyerly; L M Neville; D T Evans; J Fill; S Allen; W Greene; R Sautter; P Hnatuck; D J Torpey; R Schwalbe
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Comparison of a commercial real-time PCR assay for tcdB detection to a cell culture cytotoxicity assay and toxigenic culture for direct detection of toxin-producing Clostridium difficile in clinical samples.

Authors:  Paul D Stamper; Romina Alcabasa; Deborah Aird; Wisal Babiker; Jennifer Wehrlin; Ijeoma Ikpeama; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2008-12-10       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Performance of the TechLab C. DIFF CHEK-60 enzyme immunoassay (EIA) in combination with the C. difficile Tox A/B II EIA kit, the Triage C. difficile panel immunoassay, and a cytotoxin assay for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea.

Authors:  Heather Snell; Meredith Ramos; Sue Longo; Michael John; Zafar Hussain
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Performance of TechLab C. DIFF QUIK CHEK and TechLab C. DIFFICILE TOX A/B II for the detection of Clostridium difficile in stool samples.

Authors:  Romina C Reyes; Michael A John; Diane L Ayotte; Alexia Covacich; Susan Milburn; Zafar Hussain
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2007-07-26       Impact factor: 2.803

9.  Evaluation of four commercially available enzyme immunoassays for laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diseases.

Authors:  S Whittier; D S Shapiro; W F Kelly; T P Walden; K J Wait; L T McMillon; P H Gilligan
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Multicenter evaluation of a new screening test that detects Clostridium difficile in fecal specimens.

Authors:  L Zheng; S F Keller; D M Lyerly; R J Carman; C W Genheimer; C A Gleaves; S J Kohlhepp; S Young; S Perez; K Ye
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 5.948
View more
  35 in total

1.  Comparison of GenomEra C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile as confirmatory tests in a multistep algorithm for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Luis Alcalá; Elena Reigadas; Mercedes Marín; Antonia Fernández-Chico; Pilar Catalán; Emilio Bouza
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  S D Goldenberg; P R Cliff; G L French
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Rapid and sensitive loop-mediated isothermal amplification test for Clostridium difficile detection challenges cytotoxin B cell test and culture as gold standard.

Authors:  Torbjörn Norén; Ingegärd Alriksson; Josefin Andersson; Thomas Akerlund; Magnus Unemo
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  Assessment of Clostridium difficile infections by quantitative detection of tcdB toxin by use of a real-time cell analysis system.

Authors:  Alex B Ryder; Ying Huang; Haijing Li; Min Zheng; Xiaobo Wang; Charles W Stratton; Xiao Xu; Yi-Wei Tang
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-08-18       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Impact of clinical awareness and diagnostic tests on the underdiagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  L Alcalá; E Reigadas; M Marín; A Martín; P Catalán; E Bouza
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 6.  Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection can molecular amplification methods move us out of uncertainty?

Authors:  Fred C Tenover; Ellen Jo Baron; Lance R Peterson; David H Persing
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2011-08-18       Impact factor: 5.568

7.  Modifications of commercial toxigenic Clostridium difficile PCR resulting in improved economy and workflow efficiency.

Authors:  Erik Munson; Dorothy Bilbo; Mary Paul; Maureen Napierala; Jeanne E Hryciuk
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-03-30       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Evaluation of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B rapid tests for Clostridioides (prev. Clostridium) difficile diagnosis in a university hospital in Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Authors:  Carolina Pantuzza Ramos; Emily Oliveira Lopes; Amanda Nádia Diniz; Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato; Eduardo Garcia Vilela; Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva
Journal:  Braz J Microbiol       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 2.476

9.  Easily modified factors contribute to delays in diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: a cohort study and intervention.

Authors:  Sirisha Kundrapu; Lucy A Jury; Brett Sitzlar; Venkata C K Sunkesula; Ajay K Sethi; Curtis J Donskey
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-05-15       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Clostridium difficile: Changing Epidemiology, Treatment and Infection Prevention Measures.

Authors:  Jane A Cecil
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.725
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.