Literature DB >> 28988901

Detection of toxigenic Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile: Usefulness of two commercially available enzyme immunoassays and a PCR assay on stool samples and stool isolates.

María C Legaria1, Raquel Rollet2, Ana Di Martino3, Liliana Castello4, Claudia Barberis5, María A Rossetti6, María C Guardati7, Liliana Fernández Canigia8, Graciela Carloni9, Mirta Litterio10, Marta Rocchi11, Eduardo G Anchart12, Fernando M Trejo13, Jessica Minnaard13, Diana Klajn14, Silvia C Predari4.   

Abstract

The best laboratory diagnostic approach to detect Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile infection (CDI) is a subject of ongoing debate. With the aim of evaluating four laboratory diagnostic methods, 250 unformed stools from patients with suspected CDI submitted to nine medical center laboratories from November 2010 to December 2011, were studied using: (1) an immunochromatographic rapid assay test that combines the qualitative determination of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) plus toxins A and B (QAB), the CDIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE assay; (2) an enzyme immunoassay for qualitative determination of toxins A and B, the RIDASCREEN™ C. difficile Toxin A/B assay (RAB); (3) a PCR for the toxin B gene assay (PCR); and (4) the toxigenic culture (TC). C. difficile isolates from direct toxin negative stools by QAB, RAB and PCR were evaluated for toxigenicity by the same direct tests, in order to assess the contribution of the TC (QAB-TC, RAB-TC, PCR-TC). A combination of the cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCCNA) in stools, and the same assay on isolates from direct negative samples (CCCNA-TC) was considered the reference method (CCCNA/CCCNA-TC). Of the 250 stools tested, 107 (42.8%) were positive by CCCNA/CCCNA-TC. The GDH and PCR/PCR-TC assays were the most sensitive, 91.59% and 87.62%, respectively. The QAB, RAB, QAB/QAB-TC and RAB/RAB-TC had the highest specificities, ca. 95%. A negative GDH result would rule out CDI, however, its low positive likelihood ratio (PLR) of 3.97 indicates that a positive result should always be complemented with the detection of toxins. If the RAB, QAB, and PCR assays do not detect toxins from direct feces, the toxigenic culture should be performed. In view of our results, the most accurate and reliable methods to be applied in a clinical microbiology laboratory were the QAB/QAB-TC, and RAB/RAB-TC, with PLRs >10 and negative likelihood ratios <0.30.
Copyright © 2017 Asociación Argentina de Microbiología. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CDI diagnosis; Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile; Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile infection; Diagnóstico de ICD; Infección causada por Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28988901     DOI: 10.1016/j.ram.2017.01.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Rev Argent Microbiol        ISSN: 0325-7541            Impact factor:   1.852


  4 in total

1.  Evaluation of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B rapid tests for Clostridioides (prev. Clostridium) difficile diagnosis in a university hospital in Minas Gerais, Brazil.

Authors:  Carolina Pantuzza Ramos; Emily Oliveira Lopes; Amanda Nádia Diniz; Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato; Eduardo Garcia Vilela; Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva
Journal:  Braz J Microbiol       Date:  2020-05-04       Impact factor: 2.476

2.  A Two-Step Approach for Diagnosing Glutamate Dehydrogenase Genes by Conventional Polymerase Chain Reaction from Clostridium difficile Isolates.

Authors:  Sepideh Khodaparast; Ashraf Mohabati Mobarez; Mehdi Saberifiroozi
Journal:  Middle East J Dig Dis       Date:  2019-05-15

3.  Laboratory Diagnostic Methods for Clostridioides difficile Infection: the First Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Korea.

Authors:  Hae-Sun Chung; Jeong Su Park; Bo-Moon Shin
Journal:  Ann Lab Med       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 3.464

4.  Loop mediated isothermal amplification of Clostridioides difficile isolates in gastrointestinal patients.

Authors:  Mojtaba Moosavian; Razieyeh Keshavarzi; Effat Abbasi Montazeri; Eskandar Hajiani
Journal:  AMB Express       Date:  2022-04-12       Impact factor: 3.298

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.