Literature DB >> 26348734

Overdiagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection in the Molecular Test Era.

Christopher R Polage1, Clare E Gyorke2, Michael A Kennedy2, Jhansi L Leslie3, David L Chin4, Susan Wang5, Hien H Nguyen6, Bin Huang7, Yi-Wei Tang8, Lenora W Lee6, Kyoungmi Kim9, Sandra Taylor9, Patrick S Romano10, Edward A Panacek11, Parker B Goodell11, Jay V Solnick12, Stuart H Cohen6.   

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Clostridium difficile is a major cause of health care-associated infection, but disagreement between diagnostic tests is an ongoing barrier to clinical decision making and public health reporting. Molecular tests are increasingly used to diagnose C difficile infection (CDI), but many molecular test-positive patients lack toxins that historically defined disease, making it unclear if they need treatment.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the natural history and need for treatment of patients who are toxin immunoassay negative and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive (Tox-/PCR+) for CDI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective observational cohort study at a single academic medical center among 1416 hospitalized adults tested for C difficile toxins 72 hours or longer after admission between December 1, 2010, and October 20, 2012. The analysis was conducted in stages with revisions from April 27, 2013, to January 13, 2015. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Patients undergoing C difficile testing were grouped by US Food and Drug Administration-approved toxin and PCR tests as Tox+/PCR+, Tox-/PCR+, or Tox-/PCR-. Toxin results were reported clinically. Polymerase chain reaction results were not reported. The main study outcomes were duration of diarrhea during up to 14 days of treatment, rate of CDI-related complications (ie, colectomy, megacolon, or intensive care unit care) and CDI-related death within 30 days.
RESULTS: Twenty-one percent (293 of 1416) of hospitalized adults tested for C difficile were positive by PCR, but 44.7% (131 of 293) had toxins detected by the clinical toxin test. At baseline, Tox-/PCR+ patients had lower C difficile bacterial load and less antibiotic exposure, fecal inflammation, and diarrhea than Tox+/PCR+ patients (P < .001 for all). The median duration of diarrhea was shorter in Tox-/PCR+ patients (2 days; interquartile range, 1-4 days) than in Tox+/PCR+ patients (3 days; interquartile range, 1-6 days) (P = .003) and was similar to that in Tox-/PCR- patients (2 days; interquartile range, 1-3 days), despite minimal empirical treatment of Tox-/PCR+ patients. No CDI-related complications occurred in Tox-/PCR+ patients vs 10 complications in Tox+/PCR+ patients (0% vs 7.6%, P < .001). One Tox-/PCR+ patient had recurrent CDI as a contributing factor to death within 30 days vs 11 CDI-related deaths in Tox+/PCR+ patients (0.6% vs 8.4%, P = .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among hospitalized adults with suspected CDI, virtually all CDI-related complications and deaths occurred in patients with positive toxin immunoassay test results. Patients with a positive molecular test result and a negative toxin immunoassay test result had outcomes that were comparable to patients without C difficile by either method. Exclusive reliance on molecular tests for CDI diagnosis without tests for toxins or host response is likely to result in overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and increased health care costs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26348734      PMCID: PMC4948649          DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.4114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Intern Med        ISSN: 2168-6106            Impact factor:   21.873


  47 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.  Repeat stool testing to diagnose Clostridium difficile infection using enzyme immunoassay does not increase diagnostic yield.

Authors:  Abhishek Deshpande; Vinay Pasupuleti; Preethi Patel; Gati Ajani; Geraldine Hall; Bo Hu; Anil Jain; David D K Rolston
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2011-05-13       Impact factor: 11.382

3.  Impact of PCR testing for Clostridium difficile on incident rates and potential on public reporting: is the playing field level?

Authors:  Kimberlee S Fong; Cynthia Fatica; Geraldine Hall; Gary Procop; Susan Schindler; Steven M Gordon; Thomas G Fraser
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.254

Review 4.  Nosocomial diarrhea: evaluation and treatment of causes other than Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  Christopher R Polage; Jay V Solnick; Stuart H Cohen
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2012-06-14       Impact factor: 9.079

5.  What is the current role of algorithmic approaches for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection?

Authors:  Mark H Wilcox; Tim Planche; Ferric C Fang; Peter Gilligan
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 5.948

6.  Real-time polymerase chain reaction detection of asymptomatic Clostridium difficile colonization and rising C. difficile-associated disease rates.

Authors:  Hoonmo L Koo; John N Van; Meina Zhao; Xunyan Ye; Paula A Revell; Zhi-Dong Jiang; Carolyn Z Grimes; Diana C Koo; Todd Lasco; Claudia A Kozinetz; Kevin W Garey; Herbert L DuPont
Journal:  Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol       Date:  2014-04-22       Impact factor: 3.254

Review 7.  Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: an ongoing conundrum for clinicians and for clinical laboratories.

Authors:  Carey-Ann D Burnham; Karen C Carroll
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 26.132

8.  Impact of clinical symptoms on interpretation of diagnostic assays for Clostridium difficile infections.

Authors:  Erik R Dubberke; Zhuolin Han; Linda Bobo; Tiffany Hink; Brenda Lawrence; Susan Copper; Joan Hoppe-Bauer; Carey-Ann D Burnham; William Michael Dunne
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2011-06-22       Impact factor: 5.948

9.  Multistate point-prevalence survey of health care-associated infections.

Authors:  Shelley S Magill; Jonathan R Edwards; Wendy Bamberg; Zintars G Beldavs; Ghinwa Dumyati; Marion A Kainer; Ruth Lynfield; Meghan Maloney; Laura McAllister-Hollod; Joelle Nadle; Susan M Ray; Deborah L Thompson; Lucy E Wilson; Scott K Fridkin
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2014-03-27       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Effect of nucleic acid amplification testing on population-based incidence rates of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Carolyn V Gould; Jonathan R Edwards; Jessica Cohen; Wendy M Bamberg; Leigh Ann Clark; Monica M Farley; Helen Johnston; Joelle Nadle; Lisa Winston; Dale N Gerding; L Clifford McDonald; Fernanda C Lessa
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2013-07-29       Impact factor: 20.999

View more
  174 in total

1.  Fecal Microbiota Transplantation Capsules with Targeted Colonic Versus Gastric Delivery in Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection: A Comparative Cohort Analysis of High and Lose Dose.

Authors:  Jessica R Allegretti; Monika Fischer; Sashidhar V Sagi; Matthew E Bohm; Hala M Fadda; Sejal R Ranmal; Shrish Budree; Abdul W Basit; Dean L Glettig; Eva L de la Serna; Amanda Gentile; Ylaine Gerardin; Sonia Timberlake; Rotem Sadovsky; Mark Smith; Zain Kassam
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2018-12-05       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  Evolving Strategies to Manage Clostridium difficile Colitis.

Authors:  Jessica A Bowman; Garth H Utter
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-11-25       Impact factor: 3.452

Review 3.  Primary Prevention of Clostridium difficile-Associated Diarrhea: Current Controversies and Future Tools.

Authors:  Zachary A Rubin; Elise M Martin; Paul Allyn
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2018-06-29       Impact factor: 3.725

4.  Clostridium difficile PCR Cycle Threshold Predicts Free Toxin.

Authors:  Fiona Senchyna; Rajiv L Gaur; Saurabh Gombar; Cynthia Y Truong; Lee F Schroeder; Niaz Banaei
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 5.948

5.  Toxin positivity and tcdB gene load in broad-spectrum Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Hyeong Nyeon Kim; Hanah Kim; Hee-Won Moon; Mina Hur; Yeo-Min Yun
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 3.553

6.  Evaluation of the Use of Rectal Swabs for Laboratory Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection.

Authors:  N Jazmati; E Kirpal; E Piepenbrock; Y Stelzer; M J G T Vehreschild; H Seifert
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2018-06-25       Impact factor: 5.948

7.  PCR cycle threshold to assess a diagnostic stewardship intervention for C. difficile testing.

Authors:  Gregory R Madden; Melinda D Poulter; Costi D Sifri
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2018-09-28       Impact factor: 6.072

8.  Toxin A-negative toxin B-positive ribotype 017 Clostridium difficile is the dominant strain type in patients with diarrhoea attending tuberculosis hospitals in Cape Town, South Africa.

Authors:  B Kullin; J Wojno; V Abratt; S J Reid
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2016-09-30       Impact factor: 3.267

Review 9.  Understanding Clostridium difficile Colonization.

Authors:  Monique J T Crobach; Jonathan J Vernon; Vivian G Loo; Ling Yuan Kong; Séverine Péchiné; Mark H Wilcox; Ed J Kuijper
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Rev       Date:  2018-03-14       Impact factor: 26.132

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.