Literature DB >> 29292260

[Efficacy of real-time PCR for detecting Clostridium difficile infection: comparison with enzyme-linked fluorescent spectroscopy-based approaches].

Li-Zhi Wang1, Li-Dan Chen, Bin Xiao, Yan-Ling Gan, Lin-Hai Li, Qian Wang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of real?time polymerase chain reaction (q?PCR) for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in comparison with routine culture and enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy?based aprroaches.
METHODS: Stool samples were collected from suspected CDI cases in General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command of PLA between May and December in 2016. All the samples were examined with 3 methods, namely enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy for detecting Clostridium difficile toxin A/B (CDAB), detection of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), and q?PCR for amplification of Clostridium difficile?specific gene tpi and toxin gene (tcdA/tcdB), with the results of fecal culture as the reference for evaluating the diagnostic efficacy of the 3 methods.
RESULTS: Of the total of 70 fecal samples, 13 (18.57%) were found to be positive for Clostridium difficile, including toxin?producing strains in 6 (8.57%) samples. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic coincidence rate of q?PCR for tpi were 92.31%, 91.23%, 70.59%, 98.11% and 91.43%, respectively, which were significantly higher than those of GDH test (84.62%, 84.21%, 55.00%, 96.00%, and 84.29%, respectively; Χ2=24.881, P<0.001). The sensitivity of q?PCR for tcdA/cdB was significantly higher than that of enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy for CDAB in detecting CDI (66.67% vs 33.33%; Χ2=35.918, P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: Both CDAB detection and q?PCR have a high specificity in detecting CDI, but GDH detection has a good sensitivity, and all these 3 methods have a high negative predictive value. Compared with other detection methods, amplification of tpi and tcdA/tcdB using q?PCR allows more rapid, sensitive and specific detection of CDI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29292260      PMCID: PMC6744010     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nan Fang Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao        ISSN: 1673-4254


  17 in total

1.  Molecular characterization and antimicrobial susceptibility of tcdA-negative Clostridium difficile isolates from Guangzhou, China.

Authors:  Chen Lidan; Li Linhai; Liao Yang; Sun Zhaohui; Huang Xiaoyan; Shi Yuling
Journal:  Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2015-12-23       Impact factor: 2.803

2.  Molecular and clinical characteristics of Clostridium difficile infection in a University Hospital in Shanghai, China.

Authors:  Haihui Huang; Shi Wu; Minggui Wang; Yingyuan Zhang; Hong Fang; Ann-Chatrin Palmgren; Andrej Weintraub; Carl Erik Nord
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Toxin-positive Clostridium difficile latently infect mouse colonies and protect against highly pathogenic C. difficile.

Authors:  Lucie Etienne-Mesmin; Benoit Chassaing; Oluwaseyi Adekunle; Lisa M Mattei; Frederic D Bushman; Andrew T Gewirtz
Journal:  Gut       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 23.059

4.  Effect of a Health Care System Respiratory Fluoroquinolone Restriction Program To Alter Utilization and Impact Rates of Clostridium difficile Infection.

Authors:  Katherine M Shea; Athena L V Hobbs; Theresa C Jaso; Jack D Bissett; Christopher M Cruz; Elizabeth T Douglass; Kevin W Garey
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-05-24       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 5.  Clostridium difficile infection: Early history, diagnosis and molecular strain typing methods.

Authors:  C Rodriguez; J Van Broeck; B Taminiau; M Delmée; G Daube
Journal:  Microb Pathog       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 3.738

6.  Clostridium perfringens type C and Clostridium difficile co-infection in foals.

Authors:  F A Uzal; S S Diab; P Blanchard; J Moore; L Anthenill; F Shahriar; J P Garcia; J G Songer
Journal:  Vet Microbiol       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 3.293

Review 7.  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

Review 8.  European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID): data review and recommendations for diagnosing Clostridium difficile-infection (CDI).

Authors:  M J T Crobach; O M Dekkers; M H Wilcox; E J Kuijper
Journal:  Clin Microbiol Infect       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 8.067

9.  Molecular epidemiology and antimicrobial susceptibility of Clostridium difficile isolates from two Korean hospitals.

Authors:  Asiimwe Nicholas; Yu Kyung Kim; Won-Kil Lee; Gati Noble Selasi; Seok Hyeon Na; Hyo Il Kwon; Yoo Jeong Kim; Hae Sook Lee; Kyung Eun Song; Jeong Hwan Shin; Je Chul Lee
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Clostridium perfringens type A netF and netE positive and Clostridium difficile co-infection in two adult dogs.

Authors:  Amanda Nádia Diniz; Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva; Carlos Augusto Oliveira Junior; Felipe Pierezan; Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato
Journal:  Anaerobe       Date:  2016-01-04       Impact factor: 3.331

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.