Literature DB >> 23831282

Clinical relevance of a positive molecular test in the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

I Baker1, J P Leeming, R Reynolds, I Ibrahim, E Darley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2011, the Department of Health advised that a two-stage test approach should be used to improve accuracy of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) diagnosis. No specific test protocol was established at that time. AIM: To compare clinical features of inpatient CDI cases identified by toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) with those identified as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive but toxin EIA negative.
METHODS: During a six-month period (2011-2012), 2181 liquid faeces samples submitted to North Bristol NHS Trust were tested by EIA for both toxin and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH). A total of 215 toxin or GDH EIA-positive samples were tested by Cepheid Xpert PCR assay; 128 clinically evaluable inpatients were grouped by test result, and their duration of diarrhoea and 14-day mortality compared.
FINDINGS: Inpatients with a positive PCR but negative toxin EIA had a significantly lower 14-day all-cause mortality [11%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4-23%] than patients with a positive PCR and positive toxin EIA test (37%; 95% CI: 19-59%; P = 0.01), and a smaller proportion of patients had prolonged diarrhoea (>5 days or unresolved at death: 19%; CI: 9-32%, vs 67%; CI: 45-84%; P < 0.001). A positive toxin EIA test was a significant independent predictor of death [odds ratio (OR): 4.7, 95% CI: 1.4-15.4; P = 0.01] and prolonged diarrhoea (OR: 8.6; CI: 2.9-25.6; P < 0.001), but a positive PCR (given positive GDH EIA) was not.
CONCLUSION: The clinical significance of a positive PCR result without a positive toxin EIA is questionable; such a result is associated with a significantly lower mortality and shorter duration of symptoms than patients with a positive toxin EIA.
Copyright © 2013 The Healthcare Infection Society. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clostridium difficile infection; Enzyme immunoassay; Glutamate dehydrogenase; Toxin A/B

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23831282     DOI: 10.1016/j.jhin.2013.05.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Hosp Infect        ISSN: 0195-6701            Impact factor:   3.926


  22 in total

Review 1.  Ultrasensitive Detection and Quantification of Toxins for Optimized Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection.

Authors:  Nira R Pollock
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Reply to Planche et al.

Authors:  Krishna Rao; Vincent B Young; David M Aronoff
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Clostridium difficile ribotype 027: relationship to age, detectability of toxins A or B in stool with rapid testing, severe infection, and mortality.

Authors:  Krishna Rao; Dejan Micic; Mukil Natarajan; Spencer Winters; Mark J Kiel; Seth T Walk; Kavitha Santhosh; Jill A Mogle; Andrzej T Galecki; William LeBar; Peter D R Higgins; Vincent B Young; David M Aronoff
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  Point-Counterpoint: What Is the Optimal Approach for Detection of Clostridium difficile Infection?

Authors:  Ferric C Fang; Christopher R Polage; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-01-11       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  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

6.  Molecular-based diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection is associated with reduced mortality.

Authors:  Tomer Avni; Tanya Babich; Haim Ben-Zvi; Alaa Atamna; Dafna Yahav; Daniel Shepshelovich; Yaara Leibovici-Weissman; Jihad Bishara
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2018-04-07       Impact factor: 3.267

7.  Nucleic Acid Amplification Test Quantitation as Predictor of Toxin Presence in Clostridium difficile Infection.

Authors:  M J T Crobach; N Duszenko; E M Terveer; C M Verduin; E J Kuijper
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Toxin Enzyme Immunoassays Detect Clostridioides difficile Infection With Greater Severity and Higher Recurrence Rates.

Authors:  Alice Y Guh; Kelly M Hatfield; Lisa G Winston; Brittany Martin; Helen Johnston; Geoffrey Brousseau; Monica M Farley; Lucy Wilson; Rebecca Perlmutter; Erin C Phipps; Ghinwa K Dumyati; Deborah Nelson; Trupti Hatwar; Marion A Kainer; Ashley L Paulick; Maria Karlsson; Dale N Gerding; L Clifford McDonald
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 9.079

9.  Dual Reporting of Clostridioides difficile PCR and Predicted Toxin Result Based on PCR Cycle Threshold Reduces Treatment of Toxin-Negative Patients without Increases in Adverse Outcomes.

Authors:  Matthew M Hitchcock; Marisa Holubar; Catherine A Hogan; Lucy S Tompkins; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.