Literature DB >> 22259201

Clostridium difficile testing algorithms using glutamate dehydrogenase antigen and C. difficile toxin enzyme immunoassays with C. difficile nucleic acid amplification testing increase diagnostic yield in a tertiary pediatric population.

Kaede V Ota1, Karin L McGowan.   

Abstract

We evaluated the performance of the rapid C. diff Quik Chek Complete's glutamate dehydrogenase antigen (GDH) and toxin A/B (CDT) tests in two algorithmic approaches for a tertiary pediatric population: algorithm 1 entailed initial testing with GDH/CDT followed by loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and algorithm 2 entailed GDH/CDT followed by cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) for adjudication of discrepant GDH-positive/CDT-negative results. A true positive (TP) was defined as positivity by CCNA or positivity by LAMP plus another test (GDH, CDT, or the Premier C. difficile toxin A and B enzyme immunoassay [P-EIA]). A total of 141 specimens from 141 patients yielded 27 TPs and 19% prevalence. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 56%, 100%, 100%, and 90% for P-EIA and 81%, 100%, 100%, and 96% for both algorithm 1 and algorithm 2. In summary, GDH-based algorithms detected C. difficile infections with superior sensitivity compared to P-EIA. The algorithms allowed immediate reporting of half of all TPs, but LAMP or CCNA was required to confirm the presence or absence of toxigenic C. difficile in GDH-positive/CDT-negative specimens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22259201      PMCID: PMC3318566          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.05620-11

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


  18 in total

1.  Detection of loop-mediated isothermal amplification reaction by turbidity derived from magnesium pyrophosphate formation.

Authors:  Y Mori; K Nagamine; N Tomita; T Notomi
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2001-11-23       Impact factor: 3.575

Review 2.  Clostridium difficile--more difficult than ever.

Authors:  Ciarán P Kelly; J Thomas LaMont
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2008-10-30       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Evaluation of diagnostic tests for Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Jonathan Swindells; Nigel Brenwald; Nathan Reading; Beryl Oppenheim
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-12-23       Impact factor: 5.948

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

Authors:  Criziel D Quinn; Susan E Sefers; Wisal Babiker; Ying He; Romina Alcabasa; Charles W Stratton; Karen C Carroll; Yi-Wei Tang
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 5.  Tests for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: the next generation.

Authors:  Karen C Carroll
Journal:  Anaerobe       Date:  2011-03-03       Impact factor: 3.331

6.  Clinical practice guidelines for Clostridium difficile infection in adults: 2010 update by the society for healthcare epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the infectious diseases society of America (IDSA).

Authors:  Stuart H Cohen; Dale N Gerding; Stuart Johnson; Ciaran P Kelly; Vivian G Loo; L Clifford McDonald; Jacques Pepin; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.254

7.  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

8.  Comparison of nine commercially available Clostridium difficile toxin detection assays, a real-time PCR assay for C. difficile tcdB, and a glutamate dehydrogenase detection assay to cytotoxin testing and cytotoxigenic culture methods.

Authors:  Kerrie Eastwood; Patrick Else; André Charlett; Mark Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-08-26       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Comparison of BD GeneOhm Cdiff real-time PCR assay with a two-step algorithm and a toxin A/B enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for diagnosis of toxigenic Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Kvach; David Ferguson; Paul F Riska; Marie L Landry
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-10-28       Impact factor: 5.948

10.  Presence of the epidemic North American Pulsed Field type 1 Clostridium difficile strain in hospitalized children.

Authors:  Philip Toltzis; Jason Kim; Michael Dul; Joan Zoltanski; Sarah Smathers; Theoklis Zaoutis
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 4.406

View more
  16 in total

Review 1.  Molecular techniques for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  John C O'Horo; Amy Jones; Matthew Sternke; Christopher Harper; Nasia Safdar
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 7.616

Review 2.  Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infections in Children.

Authors:  Stella Antonara; Amy L Leber
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  Ultrasound diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea.

Authors:  Y Wiener-Well; S Kaloti; I Hadas-Halpern; G Munter; A M Yinnon
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-07-15       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 4.  Laboratory diagnosis of bacterial gastroenteritis.

Authors:  Romney M Humphries; Andrea J Linscott
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 26.132

Review 5.  Laboratory Tests for the Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Karen C Carroll; Masako Mizusawa
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2020-02-25

Review 6.  Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Wiep Klaas Smits; Dena Lyras; D Borden Lacy; Mark H Wilcox; Ed J Kuijper
Journal:  Nat Rev Dis Primers       Date:  2016-04-07       Impact factor: 52.329

7.  Clostridium difficile infection diagnosis in a paediatric population: comparison of methodologies.

Authors:  J Hart; P Putsathit; D R Knight; L Sammels; T V Riley; A Keil
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2014-04-30       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 8.  Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: an ongoing conundrum for clinicians and for clinical laboratories.

Authors:  Carey-Ann D Burnham; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 26.132

9.  Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: Comparison of Techlab C. diff Quik Chek Complete, Xpert C. difficile, and multistep algorithmic approach.

Authors:  Ja Young Seo; Ji Hun Jeong; Kyung Hee Kim; Jeong-Yeal Ahn; Pil-Whan Park; Yiel-Hea Seo
Journal:  J Clin Lab Anal       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 2.352

10.  Development and Validation of Digital Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays for Ultrasensitive Detection and Quantification of Clostridium difficile Toxins in Stool.

Authors:  Linan Song; Mingwei Zhao; David C Duffy; Joshua Hansen; Kelsey Shields; Manida Wungjiranirun; Xinhua Chen; Hua Xu; Daniel A Leffler; Susan P Sambol; Dale N Gerding; Ciarán P Kelly; Nira R Pollock
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 5.948

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.