Literature DB >> 23121550

Overcoming barriers to effective recognition and diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

M H Wilcox1.   

Abstract

With the frequency of cases of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) increasing in many developed countries, accurate and reliable laboratory diagnosis of CDI is more important than ever. However, the diagnosis of CDI has been handicapped by the existence of two reference standards, one of which detects C. difficile toxin (cytotoxin assay) and the other only toxigenic strains (cytotoxigenic culture). Being relatively slow and laborious to perform, these reference methods were largely abandoned as routine diagnostic methods for toxin detection in favour of stand-alone rapid enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), which have suboptimal sensitivity and specificity. The management of CDI is undermined by high rates of both false-positive and false-negative test results. More recently developed nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for toxin gene detection offer improved sensitivity over immunoassays, but fail to discriminate between CDI and asymptomatic colonization with C. difficile, and have clear drawbacks as stand-alone diagnostic tests. Two-step or three-step diagnostic algorithms have been proposed as a solution. In a large study of the effectiveness of currently available tests, a diagnostic algorithm was developed that combines available tests to more effectively distinguish patients with CDI from uninfected patients. This two-test protocol, which is now used in National Health Service laboratories in England, comprises an EIA for glutamate dehydrogenase detection or NAATs for toxin gene detection, followed by a relatively sensitive toxin EIA. This algorithm also identifies 'potential C. difficile excretors', individuals with diarrhoeal samples that contain C. difficile but without demonstrable toxin, who may be a source of transmission of C. difficile to susceptible patients.
© 2012 The Author Clinical Microbiology and Infection © 2012 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23121550     DOI: 10.1111/1469-0691.12057

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


  35 in total

1.  Real-time cellular analysis coupled with a specimen enrichment accurately detects and quantifies Clostridium difficile toxins in stool.

Authors:  Bin Huang; Dazhi Jin; Jing Zhang; Janet Y Sun; Xiaobo Wang; Jeffrey Stiles; Xiao Xu; Mini Kamboj; N Esther Babady; Yi-Wei Tang
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2014-01-22       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Clinical heterogeneity of patients with stool samples testing PCR+/Tox- from a two-step Clostridium difficile diagnostic algorithm.

Authors:  Jason Zou; Victor Leung; Sylvie Champagne; Michelle Hinch; Anna Wong; Elisa Lloyd-Smith; Trong Tien Nguyen; Marc G Romney; Azra Sharma; Michael Payne; Christopher F Lowe
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2018-09-20       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Reply to Walker et al.

Authors:  Seth T Walk; Dejan Micic; Andrzej T Galecki; Mary A M Rogers; Laraine Washer; Duane W Newton; Preeti N Malani; Vincent B Young; David M Aronoff
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2013-02-18       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Evaluation of a new automated homogeneous PCR assay, GenomEra C. difficile, for rapid detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in fecal specimens.

Authors:  Jari J Hirvonen; Silja Mentula; Suvi-Sirkku Kaukoranta
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2013-06-26       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 5.  Emerging technologies for the clinical microbiology laboratory.

Authors:  Blake W Buchan; Nathan A Ledeboer
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 26.132

Review 6.  Clinical update for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Edward C Oldfield; Edward C Oldfield; David A Johnson
Journal:  World J Gastrointest Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2014-02-06

7.  Is there a relationship between the presence of the binary toxin genes in Clostridium difficile strains and the severity of C. difficile infection (CDI)?

Authors:  C E Berry; K A Davies; D W Owens; M H Wilcox
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2017-08-05       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 8.  Host response to Clostridium difficile infection: Diagnostics and detection.

Authors:  Elena A Usacheva; Jian-P Jin; Lance R Peterson
Journal:  J Glob Antimicrob Resist       Date:  2016-09-20       Impact factor: 4.035

Review 9.  Clostridium difficile infection: epidemiology, diagnosis and understanding transmission.

Authors:  Jessica S H Martin; Tanya M Monaghan; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2016-03-09       Impact factor: 46.802

Review 10.  Clostridium difficile Infection in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

Authors:  Nancy Fu; Titus Wong
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 3.725

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.