Literature DB >> 26555737

Diagnostic testing for Clostridium difficile in Italian microbiological laboratories.

Patrizia Spigaglia1, Fabrizio Barbanti2, Matteo Morandi3, Maria Luisa Moro3, Paola Mastrantonio2.   

Abstract

A laboratory diagnosis survey of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) was performed in Italy in 2012-2013. Questionnaires from 278 healthcare settings from 15 regions of Italy were collected and analysed. Eighty seven percent of the laboratories declared to routinely perform CDI diagnosis, 99% of them only after the clinician's request. Among the 216 laboratories providing information on the size of the hospitals in which they were located, 65 had more than 500 beds (large hospitals), while 151 had less than 500 beds (small hospitals). The average percentage of positive tests for C. difficile toxins was 12.2%. Almost half of the laboratories (42%) used immunoenzymatic assay (EIA) for Tox A/B as a stand-alone method, while only 34% used an algorithm for CDI as indicated by the European guidelines. A low percentage of laboratories performed molecular assays or C. difficile culture, 25% and 29%, respectively. Most laboratories (161/278) declared to type C. difficile strains, the majority in collaboration with a reference laboratory. Among the 103 C. difficile clinical isolates collected during the study, 31 different PCR-ribotypes were identified. PCR-ribotype 356/607 (27%) was predominant, followed by 018 (12%). These two PCR-ribotypes show 87.5% of similarity in ribotyping profile. PCR-ribotypes 027 and 078 represented 8% and 4% of the strains, respectively. Four PCR-ribotypes (027, 033, 078 and 126) were positive for the binary toxin CDT. In particular, PCR-ribotype 033 produces only CDT, and it has recently been associated with symptomatic cases. The majority of strains were multidrug resistant. In particular, all strains PCR-ribotypes 356/607 and 018 were resistant to moxifloxacin, rifampicin, erythromycin and clindamycin. The results obtained highlight the need to raise awareness to the microbiological diagnosis of CDI among clinicians and to implement and harmonize diagnostic methods for CDI in Italian laboratories in the perspective of a future national surveillance.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clostridium difficile; Laboratory diagnosis; PCR-ribotype 018; PCR-ribotype 356; Survey

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26555737     DOI: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2015.11.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaerobe        ISSN: 1075-9964            Impact factor:   3.331


  11 in total

Review 1.  Recent advances in the understanding of antibiotic resistance in Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Patrizia Spigaglia
Journal:  Ther Adv Infect Dis       Date:  2016-02

2.  Clostridium difficile infections in Finland, 2008-2015: trends, diagnostics and ribotypes.

Authors:  S Mentula; S M Kotila; O Lyytikäinen; S Ibrahem; J Ollgren; A Virolainen
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Clearance of Clostridioides difficile Colonization Is Associated with Antibiotic-Specific Bacterial Changes.

Authors:  Nicholas A Lesniak; Alyxandria M Schubert; Hamide Sinani; Patrick D Schloss
Journal:  mSphere       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 4.389

4.  Surveillance of Clostridium difficile Infections: Results from a Six-Year Retrospective Study in Nine Hospitals of a North Italian Local Health Authority.

Authors:  Greta Roncarati; Laura Dallolio; Erica Leoni; Manuela Panico; Angela Zanni; Patrizia Farruggia
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2017-01-10       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Two Distinct Patterns of Clostridium difficile Diversity Across Europe Indicating Contrasting Routes of Spread.

Authors:  David W Eyre; Kerrie A Davies; Georgina Davis; Warren N Fawley; Kate E Dingle; Nicola De Maio; Andreas Karas; Derrick W Crook; Tim E A Peto; A Sarah Walker; Mark H Wilcox
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2018-09-14       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Host-targeted niclosamide inhibits C. difficile virulence and prevents disease in mice without disrupting the gut microbiota.

Authors:  John Tam; Therwa Hamza; Bing Ma; Kevin Chen; Greg L Beilhartz; Jacques Ravel; Hanping Feng; Roman A Melnyk
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2018-12-07       Impact factor: 14.919

7.  Draft Genome Sequence of Clostridium difficile Strain IT1118, an Epidemic Isolate Belonging to the Emerging PCR Ribotype 018.

Authors:  François Wasels; Fabrizio Barbanti; Patrizia Spigaglia
Journal:  Genome Announc       Date:  2016-07-21

8.  Prevalence of binary toxin positive Clostridium difficile in diarrhoeal humans in the absence of epidemic ribotype 027.

Authors:  Alan M McGovern; Grace O Androga; Daniel R Knight; Mark W Watson; Briony Elliott; Niki F Foster; Barbara J Chang; Thomas V Riley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-08       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Antimicrobial susceptibility and molecular characterisation using whole-genome sequencing of Clostridioides difficile collected in 82 hospitals in Japan between 2014 and 2016.

Authors:  Kotaro Aoki; Shinobu Takeda; Takashi Miki; Yoshikazu Ishii; Kazuhiro Tateda
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2019-09-16       Impact factor: 5.191

10.  Rapid Classification of Clostridioides difficile Strains Using MALDI-TOF MS Peak-Based Assay in Comparison with PCR-Ribotyping.

Authors:  Adriana Calderaro; Mirko Buttrini; Monica Martinelli; Benedetta Farina; Tiziano Moro; Sara Montecchini; Maria Cristina Arcangeletti; Carlo Chezzi; Flora De Conto
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2021-03-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.