Literature DB >> 24226924

Comparison of Simplexa universal direct PCR with cytotoxicity assay for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: performance, cost, and correlation with disease.

Marie L Landry1, David Ferguson, Jeffrey Topal.   

Abstract

Simplexa Clostridium difficile universal direct PCR, a real-time PCR assay for the detection of the C. difficile toxin B (tcdB) gene using the 3M integrated cycler, was compared with a two-step algorithm which includes the C. Diff Chek-60 glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen assay followed by cytotoxin neutralization. Three hundred forty-two liquid or semisolid stools submitted for diagnostic C. difficile testing, 171 GDH antigen positive and 171 GDH antigen negative, were selected for the study. All samples were tested by the C. Diff Chek-60 GDH antigen assay, cytotoxin neutralization, and Simplexa direct PCR. Of 171 GDH-positive samples, 4 were excluded (from patients on therapy or from whom duplicate samples were obtained) and 88 were determined to be true positives for toxigenic C. difficile. Of the 88, 67 (76.1%) were positive by the two-step method and 86 (97.7%) were positive by PCR. Seventy-nine were positive by the GDH antigen assay only. Of 171 GDH antigen-negative samples, none were positive by PCR. One antigen-negative sample positive by the cytotoxin assay only was deemed a false positive based on chart review. Simplexa C. difficile universal direct PCR was significantly more sensitive for detecting toxigenic C. difficile bacteria than cytotoxin neutralization (P = 0.0002). However, most PCR-positive/cytotoxin-negative patients did not have clear C. difficile disease. The estimated cost avoidance provided by a more rapid molecular diagnosis was outweighed by the cost of isolating and treating PCR-positive/cytotoxin-negative patients. The costs, clinical consequences, and impact on nosocomial transmission of treating and/or isolating patients positive for toxigenic C. difficile by PCR but negative for in vivo toxin production merit further study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24226924      PMCID: PMC3911468          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02545-13

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


  28 in total

1.  Rapid detection of toxigenic strains of Clostridium difficile in diarrheal stools by real-time PCR.

Authors:  Frédéric Barbut; Mylena Braun; Béatrice Burghoffer; Valérie Lalande; Catherine Eckert
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2009-02-25       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Asymptomatic carriage of Clostridium difficile and serum levels of IgG antibody against toxin A.

Authors:  L Kyne; M Warny; A Qamar; C P Kelly
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-02-10       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Characterization of polymorphisms in the toxin A and B genes of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  M Rupnik; V Braun; F Soehn; M Janc; M Hofstetter; R Laufenberg-Feldmann; C von Eichel-Streiber
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  1997-03-15       Impact factor: 2.742

4.  Primary symptomless colonisation by Clostridium difficile and decreased risk of subsequent diarrhoea.

Authors:  J K Shim; S Johnson; M H Samore; D Z Bliss; D N Gerding
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-02-28       Impact factor: 79.321

5.  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

6.  Persistence of skin contamination and environmental shedding of Clostridium difficile during and after treatment of C. difficile infection.

Authors:  Ajay K Sethi; Wafa N Al-Nassir; Michelle M Nerandzic; Greg S Bobulsky; Curtis J Donskey
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 3.254

7.  Yield of stool culture with isolate toxin testing versus a two-step algorithm including stool toxin testing for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Megan E Reller; Clara A Lema; Trish M Perl; Mian Cai; Tracy L Ross; Kathleen A Speck; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2007-09-05       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  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

9.  Treatment of asymptomatic Clostridium difficile carriers (fecal excretors) with vancomycin or metronidazole. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

Authors:  S Johnson; S R Homann; K M Bettin; J N Quick; C R Clabots; L R Peterson; D N Gerding
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1992-08-15       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Differences in outcome according to Clostridium difficile testing method: a prospective multicentre diagnostic validation study of C difficile infection.

Authors:  Timothy D Planche; Kerrie A Davies; Pietro G Coen; John M Finney; Irene M Monahan; Kirsti A Morris; Lily O'Connor; Sarah J Oakley; Cassie F Pope; Mike W Wren; Nandini P Shetty; Derrick W Crook; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2013-09-03       Impact factor: 25.071

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Rapid detection of Clostridium difficile toxins and laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infections.

Authors:  Shuyi Chen; Huawei Gu; Chunli Sun; Haiying Wang; Jufang Wang
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2016-09-06       Impact factor: 3.553

2.  ID Learning Unit: Understanding and Interpreting Testing for Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Daniel A Solomon; Danny A Milner
Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis       Date:  2014-05-16       Impact factor: 3.835

3.  Evaluation of Copan FecalSwab as Specimen Type for Use in Xpert C. difficile Assay.

Authors:  Michael J Mashock; Matthew L Faron; Blake W Buchan; Nathan A Ledeboer
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-08-09       Impact factor: 5.948

4.  A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) and Algorithms Including NAATs for the Diagnosis of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile in Adults.

Authors:  Colleen S Kraft; J Scott Parrott; Nancy E Cornish; Matthew L Rubinstein; Alice S Weissfeld; Peggy McNult; Irving Nachamkin; Romney M Humphries; Thomas J Kirn; Jennifer Dien Bard; Joseph D Lutgring; Jonathan C Gullett; Cassiana E Bittencourt; Susan Benson; April M Bobenchik; Robert L Sautter; Vickie Baselski; Michel C Atlas; Elizabeth M Marlowe; Nancy S Miller; Monika Fischer; Sandra S Richter; Peter Gilligan; James W Snyder
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2019-05-29       Impact factor: 26.132

5.  Performance Evaluation of the Luminex Aries C. difficile Assay in Comparison to Two Other Molecular Assays within a Multihospital Health Care Center.

Authors:  Stefan Juretschko; Ryhana Manji; Reeti Khare; Shubhagata Das; Sherry Dunbar
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2019-10-23       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  False Negative Results in Clostridium difficile Testing.

Authors:  Yanal M Murad; Justo Perez; Gustavo Ybazeta; Sarah Mavin; Sebastien Lefebvre; J Scott Weese; Joyce Rousseau; Francisco Diaz-Mitoma; Reza Nokhbeh
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 3.090

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.