Harry Sokol1, Valérie Lalande2, Cecilia Landman3, Anne Bourrier3, Isabelle Nion-Larmurier3, Sylvie Rajca3, Julien Kirchgesner3, Philippe Seksik4, Jacques Cosnes3, Frédéric Barbut5, Laurent Beaugerie3. 1. Department of Gastroenterology, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, and GRC-UPMC 03, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France; Sorbonne University-UPMC Univ Paris 06, INSERM ERL 1157, Avenir Team Gut Microbiota and Immunity, UMR 7203, Saint-Antoine Hospital, Paris, France; INRA, UMR1319 Micalis & AgroParisTech, Jouy en Josas, France; Inflammation-Immunopathology-Biotherapy Department (DHU i2B), Paris, France. Electronic address: harry.sokol@aphp.fr. 2. Department of Microbiology, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France; Clinical Research Group EPIDIFF, UPMC University Paris 03, Paris, France. 3. Department of Gastroenterology, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, and GRC-UPMC 03, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France. 4. Department of Gastroenterology, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, and GRC-UPMC 03, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France; Inflammation-Immunopathology-Biotherapy Department (DHU i2B), Paris, France. 5. Department of Microbiology, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France; National Reference Laboratory for Clostridium difficile, Saint Antoine Hospital, AP-HP, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France; Clinical Research Group EPIDIFF, UPMC University Paris 03, Paris, France.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a common complication in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and has been associated with poor IBD outcome. The aims of our study were to look for predictive factors of CDI in patients hospitalized for IBD flare and to evaluate a rapid testing strategy in this population. METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized for IBD flare in Saint-Antoine Hospital (Paris, France) were prospectively tested for CDI with a defined strategy involving rapid testing and reference methods. Risk factors for CDI were investigated and performances of diagnostic tests were evaluated. RESULTS: C. difficile testing was performed at admission in 461 hospitalizations for IBD flare. CDI was diagnosed in 35 cases (7.6%) and non-toxigenic C. difficile was identified in 10 cases (2.2%). In multivariate analysis, UC phenotype was associated with CDI (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.03-4.6, p=0.047). Glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) test had a 97.1% sensitivity and a 100% negative predictive value for CDI diagnosis but a positive predictive value of 79.1%. Enzyme immunoassay (EIA)-based toxin detection (C. Diff Quik Chek complete®, Alere) had a poor sensitivity and diagnosis was rescued by toxin PCR in 100% of cases. CONCLUSION: CDI is frequent in patients hospitalized for IBD flare. Clinical parameters do not help for the diagnosis and rapid testing should be performed in all patients. Currently, a negative result of an EIA-based toxin search associated with a positive GDH test cannot rule out a CDI and should not delay initiation of specific treatment in case of severe symptoms or high presumption.
OBJECTIVES:Clostridium difficileinfection (CDI) is a common complication in inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and has been associated with poor IBD outcome. The aims of our study were to look for predictive factors of CDI in patients hospitalized for IBD flare and to evaluate a rapid testing strategy in this population. METHODS: Consecutive patients hospitalized for IBD flare in Saint-Antoine Hospital (Paris, France) were prospectively tested for CDI with a defined strategy involving rapid testing and reference methods. Risk factors for CDI were investigated and performances of diagnostic tests were evaluated. RESULTS:C. difficile testing was performed at admission in 461 hospitalizations for IBD flare. CDI was diagnosed in 35 cases (7.6%) and non-toxigenic C. difficile was identified in 10 cases (2.2%). In multivariate analysis, UC phenotype was associated with CDI (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.03-4.6, p=0.047). Glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) test had a 97.1% sensitivity and a 100% negative predictive value for CDI diagnosis but a positive predictive value of 79.1%. Enzyme immunoassay (EIA)-based toxin detection (C. Diff Quik Chek complete®, Alere) had a poor sensitivity and diagnosis was rescued by toxin PCR in 100% of cases. CONCLUSION: CDI is frequent in patients hospitalized for IBD flare. Clinical parameters do not help for the diagnosis and rapid testing should be performed in all patients. Currently, a negative result of an EIA-based toxin search associated with a positive GDH test cannot rule out a CDI and should not delay initiation of specific treatment in case of severe symptoms or high presumption.
Authors: Damian Maseda; Joseph P Zackular; Bruno Trindade; Leslie Kirk; Jennifer Lising Roxas; Lisa M Rogers; Mary K Washington; Liping Du; Tatsuki Koyama; V K Viswanathan; Gayatri Vedantam; Patrick D Schloss; Leslie J Crofford; Eric P Skaar; David M Aronoff Journal: mBio Date: 2019-01-08 Impact factor: 7.867
Authors: Jordan E Axelrad; Ken H Cadwell; Jean-Frederic Colombel; Shailja C Shah Journal: Therap Adv Gastroenterol Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 4.409
Authors: Travis J Carlson; Anne J Gonzales-Luna; Melissa F Wilcox; Sarah G Theriault; Faris S Alnezary; Pankaj Patel; Bumhee K Ahn; Evan J Zasowski; Kevin W Garey Journal: Open Forum Infect Dis Date: 2021-08-11 Impact factor: 3.835
Authors: Rachel Bernard; Muhammad B Hammami; Forest W Arnold; Brian Mcgrath; Alieysa Patel; Brandon Wuerth; Maribeth R Nicholson; Krishna Rao; Dejan Micic Journal: Gut Pathog Date: 2022-08-30 Impact factor: 5.324