Literature DB >> 25462186

Comparative performance of the GeneXpert C. difficile PCR assay and C. diff Quik Chek Complete kit assay for detection of Clostridium difficile antigen and toxins in symptomatic community-onset infections.

Wafaa Jamal1, Eunice M Pauline2, Vincent O Rotimi2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the performance of the GeneXpert C. difficile assay and C. diff Quik Chek Complete (QCC) kit for the detection of toxins from fecal specimens and cooked meat broth (CMB) culture using toxigenic stool culture as reference method, for the diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI) in a community setting.
METHODS: Non-repeat stool samples were tested simultaneously by GeneXpert and QCC. Toxin detection was done on neat stool samples, inoculated CMB, and isolated colonies.
RESULTS: Nineteen (4.6%) of 409 samples were positive for glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) in stool and CMB by the QCC assay; seven (1.7%) were positive for both GDH and toxins A/B. The sensitivities of QCC to detect C. difficile toxin directly in stool specimens and CMB were 68.4% and 100%, respectively, while specificities were 100% and 83%, respectively. C. difficile toxin was detected in 10 (2.5%) specimens and 13 (3.2%) CMB. Thirteen (68.4%) of 19 isolates were positive for C. difficile toxin by GeneXpert and QCC and were taken as the reference toxigenic culture. The disease burden was thus 3.2%. The sensitivities of GeneXpert in stool and CMB were 81.3% and 100%, respectively, while specificities were 100% and 100%, respectively.
CONCLUSION: The GeneXpert assay was more sensitive than QCC for the detection of C. difficile toxin in stool, but both assays were highly specific.
Copyright © 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Antigen detection; Clostridium difficile; EIA; Gene Xpert; Toxin

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25462186     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijid.2014.10.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Infect Dis        ISSN: 1201-9712            Impact factor:   3.623


  5 in total

1.  Searching for a Potential Algorithm for Clostridium difficile Testing at a Tertiary Care Hospital: Does Toxin Enzyme Immunoassay Testing Help?

Authors:  Angela M Theiss; Agnes Balla; Angie Ross; Denise Francis; Christina Wojewoda
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-06-25       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Clinical evaluation of a non-purified direct molecular assay for the detection of Clostridioides difficile toxin genes in stool specimens.

Authors:  Toshinori Hara; Hiromichi Suzuki; Tadatomo Oyanagi; Norito Koyanagi; Akihito Ushiki; Naoki Kawabata; Miki Goto; Yukio Hida; Yuji Yaguchi; Kiyoko Tamai; Shigeyuki Notake; Yosuke Kawashima; Akio Sugiyama; Keiichi Uemura; Seiya Kashiyama; Toru Nanmoku; Satoshi Suzuki; Hiroshi Yamazaki; Hideki Kimura; Hiroyuki Kunishima; Hiroki Ohge
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  Burden of Clostridium (Clostridioides) difficile Infection among Patients in Western Asia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yalda Malekzadegan; Mehrdad Halaji; Meysam Hasannejad-Bibalan; Saba Jalalifar; Javad Fathi; Hadi Sedigh Ebrahim-Saraie
Journal:  Iran J Public Health       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 1.429

4.  Comparison of commercial assays and two-step approach to detect Clostridioides difficile in South Africa.

Authors:  Sarishna Singh; Mae Newton-Foot; Pieter Nel; Colette Pienaar
Journal:  Afr J Lab Med       Date:  2022-09-29

5.  Detection of clostridium difficile antigen and toxin in stool specimens: Comparison of the C. difficile quik chek complete enzyme immunoassay and GeneXpert C. difficile polymerase chain reaction assay.

Authors:  Abiola C Senok; Kamel M Aldosari; Rayan A Alowaisheq; Othman A Abid; Khalid A Alsuhaibani; Mohammad A Khan; Ali M Somily
Journal:  Saudi J Gastroenterol       Date:  2017 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.485

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.