Literature DB >> 24554744

Premarket evaluations of the IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000 Assay and the BD Max Cdiff Assay.

K A Stellrecht1, A A Espino, V P Maceira, S M Nattanmai, S A Butt, D Wroblewski, G E Hannett, K A Musser.   

Abstract

Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea is a well-recognized complication of antibiotic use. Historically, diagnosing C. difficile has been difficult, as antigen assays are insensitive and culture-based methods require several days to yield results. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are quickly becoming the standard of care. We compared the performance of two automated investigational/research use only (IUO/RUO) NAATs for the detection of C. difficile toxin genes, the IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000 Assay (IMDx) and the BD Max Cdiff Assay (Max). A prospective analysis of 111 stool specimens received in the laboratory for C. difficile testing by the laboratory's test of record (TOR), the BD GeneOhm Cdiff Assay, and a retrospective analysis of 88 specimens previously determined to be positive for C. difficile were included in the study. One prospective specimen was excluded due to loss to follow-up discrepancy analysis. Of the remaining 198 specimens, 90 were positive by all three methods, 9 were positive by TOR and Max, and 3 were positive by TOR only. One negative specimen was initially inhibitory by Max. The remaining 95 specimens were negative by all methods. Toxigenic C. difficile culture was performed on the 12 discrepant samples. True C. difficile-positive status was defined as either positive by all three amplification assays or positive by toxigenic culture. Based on this definition, the sensitivity and specificity were 96.9% and 95% for Max and 92.8% and 100% for IMDx. In summary, both highly automated systems demonstrated excellent performance, and each has individual benefits, which will ensure that they will both have a niche in clinical laboratories.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24554744      PMCID: PMC3993703          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.03293-13

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


  22 in total

1.  Rapid and simple method for purification of nucleic acids.

Authors:  R Boom; C J Sol; M M Salimans; C L Jansen; P M Wertheim-van Dillen; J van der Noordaa
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Increased sporulation rate of epidemic Clostridium difficile Type 027/NAP1.

Authors:  Thomas Akerlund; Ingela Persson; Magnus Unemo; Torbjörn Norén; Bo Svenungsson; Marlene Wullt; Lars G Burman
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 5.948

3.  A nonsense mutation abrogates production of a functional enterotoxin A in Clostridium difficile toxinotype VIII strains of serogroups F and X.

Authors:  C von Eichel-Streiber; I Zec-Pirnat; M Grabnar; M Rupnik
Journal:  FEMS Microbiol Lett       Date:  1999-09-01       Impact factor: 2.742

4.  Isolation of a toxin B-deficient mutant strain of Clostridium difficile in a case of recurrent C. difficile-associated diarrhea.

Authors:  S H Cohen; Y J Tang; B Hansen; J Silva
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  Molecular, immunological, and biological characterization of a toxin A-negative, toxin B-positive strain of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  S P Borriello; B W Wren; S Hyde; S V Seddon; P Sibbons; M M Krishna; S Tabaqchali; S Manek; A B Price
Journal:  Infect Immun       Date:  1992-10       Impact factor: 3.441

6.  Selective and differential medium for isolation of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  W L George; V L Sutter; D Citron; S M Finegold
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1979-02       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  Use of sodium taurocholate to enhance spore recovery on a medium selective for Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  K H Wilson; M J Kennedy; F R Fekety
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 5.948

8.  Clostridium difficile infection in patients discharged from US short-stay hospitals, 1996-2003.

Authors:  L Clifford McDonald; Maria Owings; Daniel B Jernigan
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 6.883

9.  Increase in Clostridium difficile-related mortality rates, United States, 1999-2004.

Authors:  Matthew D Redelings; Frank Sorvillo; Laurene Mascola
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 6.883

10.  A new method for robust quantitative and qualitative analysis of real-time PCR.

Authors:  Eric B Shain; John M Clemens
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2008-07-04       Impact factor: 16.971

View more
  8 in total

1.  Comparison of the BD MAX® Enteric Bacterial Panel assay with conventional diagnostic procedures in diarrheal stool samples.

Authors:  L Knabl; I Grutsch; D Orth-Höller
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 3.267

2.  Clostridioides difficile laboratory diagnostic techniques: a comparative approach of rapid and molecular methods.

Authors:  Thais Simões Camargo; Moacyr Silva Junior; Luis Fernando Aranha Camargo; Veronica Pivetta Biotto; André Mario Doi; Paula Celia Mariko Koga; Carolina Nunes França; Marines Dalla Valle Martino
Journal:  Arch Microbiol       Date:  2021-01-18       Impact factor: 2.552

3.  Novel portable platform for molecular detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in faeces: a diagnostic accuracy study.

Authors:  J J Hirvonen; P Matero; C Siebert; J Kauppila; R Vuento; H Tuokko; S Boisset
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2016-12-17       Impact factor: 3.267

4.  Multicenter evaluation of the BD max enteric bacterial panel PCR assay for rapid detection of Salmonella spp., Shigella spp., Campylobacter spp. (C. jejuni and C. coli), and Shiga toxin 1 and 2 genes.

Authors:  S M Harrington; B W Buchan; C Doern; R Fader; M J Ferraro; D R Pillai; J Rychert; L Doyle; A Lainesse; T Karchmer; J E Mortensen
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2015-03-04       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Evaluation of a Multiplex Real-Time PCR Assay for Detecting Major Bacterial Enteric Pathogens in Fecal Specimens: Intestinal Inflammation and Bacterial Load Are Correlated in Campylobacter Infections.

Authors:  Nadia Wohlwend; Sacha Tiermann; Lorenz Risch; Martin Risch; Thomas Bodmer
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2016-06-15       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Comparison of BD Max Cdiff and GenomEra C. difficile molecular assays for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile from stools in conventional sample containers and in FecalSwabs.

Authors:  J J Hirvonen; S-S Kaukoranta
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-01-24       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 7.  Current knowledge on the laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Adrián Martínez-Meléndez; Adrián Camacho-Ortiz; Rayo Morfin-Otero; Héctor Jesús Maldonado-Garza; Licet Villarreal-Treviño; Elvira Garza-González
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017-03-07       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Evaluation of Xpert C. difficile, BD MAX Cdiff, IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000, and Illumigene C. difficile Assays for Direct Detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in Stool Specimens.

Authors:  Bo-Moon Shin; Sun Mee Yoo; Won Chang Shin
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 3.464

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.