Literature DB >> 30232129

Evaluation of Risk Factors for Clostridium difficile Infection Based on Immunochromatography Testing and Toxigenic Culture Assay.

Toshio Ohshima1,2,3, Takako Osaki4,5, Yukari Yamamoto2, Satomi Asai6, Hayato Miyachi6, Shigeru Kamiya1,5.   

Abstract

In recent years, the diagnostic method of choice for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a rapid enzyme immunoassay in which glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen and C. difficile toxin can be detected (C. diff Quik Chek Complete; Alere Inc.) (Quik Chek). However, the clinical significance remains unclear in cases that demonstrate a positive result for GDH antigen and are negative for toxin. In this study, we used the Quik Chek test kit on fecal samples, with an additional toxin detection step using a toxigenic culture assay for the aforementioned cases. CDI risk factors were assessed among the 3 groups divided by the Quik Chek test results. The study involved 1,565 fecal samples from patients suspected to have CDI who were hospitalized during the period of April 2012 to March 2014. The 3 groups were defined as follows: both GDH antigen positive and toxin positive (by Quik Chek test) (toxin-positive [TP] group, n = 109), both GDH antigen and toxin negative (toxin-negative [TN] group, n = 111), and positive only for GDH antigen but toxin positive with subsequent toxigenic culture (toxigenic culture [TC] group, n = 72). The gender, age, number of hospitalization days, white blood cell (WBC) counts, serum albumin levels, body mass index (BMI), fecal consistency, and use of antibacterials and proton pump inhibiters (PPIs) were analyzed. The positive rate for the fecal direct Quik Chek test was 7.0% (109/1,565 cases). However, toxigenic culture assays using the Quik Chek test for only the GDH-antigen-positive/toxin-negative samples were 35.3% positive (72/204 cases). As a result, the true positive rate for C. difficile toxin detection was estimated to be 11.6% (181/1,565 cases). Moreover, significant differences (P < 0.05) in the number of hospitalization days (>50 days), WBC counts (>10,000 WBCs/μl), and use of PPIs comparing the TN, TP, and TC groups, were observed. The odds ratios (ORs) for the development of CDI were 1.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 to 2.74) and 2.98 (95% CI, 1.59 to 5.58) for numbers of hospitalization days, 2.16 (95% CI, 1.24 to 3.75) and 2.24 (95% CI, 1.21 to 4.14) for WBC counts, and 9.03 (95% CI, 4.9 to 16.6) and 9.15 (95% CI, 4.59 to 18.2) for use of PPIs in the TP and TC groups, respectively. These findings demonstrated that the use of PPIs was a significant risk factor for CDI development. Moreover, antibacterials such as carbapenems, cephalosporins, and fluoroquinolones were demonstrated to be risk factors. In conclusion, identification of the TC group of patients is thought to be important, as this study demonstrates that this group bears the same high risk of developing CDI as the TP group.
Copyright © 2018 American Society for Microbiology.

Entities:  

Keywords:  C. diff Quik Chek Complete test; Clostridium difficile infection; glutamate dehydrogenase; risk factor; toxigenic culture assay

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30232129      PMCID: PMC6258861          DOI: 10.1128/JCM.00555-18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Microbiol        ISSN: 0095-1137            Impact factor:   5.948


  21 in total

1.  Community-acquired Clostridium difficile diarrhea caused by binary toxin, toxin A, and toxin B gene-positive isolates in Hungary.

Authors:  Gabriella Terhes; Edit Urbán; József Sóki; Kanjo Abdul Hamid; Elisabeth Nagy
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 5.948

2.  Risk of Clostridium difficile infection with acid suppressing drugs and antibiotics: meta-analysis.

Authors:  Chun Shing Kwok; Aaron Kobina Arthur; Chukwudubem Ifeanyichukwu Anibueze; Sonal Singh; Rodrigo Cavallazzi; Yoon Kong Loke
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  2012-04-24       Impact factor: 10.864

3.  Predominance of Clostridium difficile ribotypes 012, 027 and 046 in a university hospital in Chile, 2012.

Authors:  Á Plaza-Garrido; J Barra-Carrasco; J H Macias; R Carman; W N Fawley; M H Wilcox; C Hernández-Rocha; A M Guzmán-Durán; M Alvarez-Lobos; D Paredes-Sabja
Journal:  Epidemiol Infect       Date:  2015-10-22       Impact factor: 2.451

4.  Detection and transcription of toxin DNA in a nontoxigenic strain of Clostridium difficile.

Authors:  J N Mathis; L Pilkinton; D E McMillin
Journal:  Curr Microbiol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.188

5.  Clostridium difficile infection: An overview of the disease and its pathogenesis, epidemiology and interventions.

Authors:  V K Viswanathan; M J Mallozzi; Gayatri Vedantam
Journal:  Gut Microbes       Date:  2010-06-16

6.  Association of proton-pump inhibitors with outcomes in Clostridium difficile colitis.

Authors:  Richard M Cadle; Mohammad D Mansouri; Nancy Logan; Denise R Kudva; Daniel M Musher
Journal:  Am J Health Syst Pharm       Date:  2007-11-15       Impact factor: 2.637

Review 7.  Risk factors for development of Clostridium difficile infection due to BI/NAP1/027 strain: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Konstantinos Z Vardakas; Athanasios A Konstantelias; Giorgos Loizidis; Petros I Rafailidis; Matthew E Falagas
Journal:  Int J Infect Dis       Date:  2012-08-22       Impact factor: 3.623

Review 8.  Clostridium difficile associated infection, diarrhea and colitis.

Authors:  Perry Hookman; Jamie S Barkin
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2009-04-07       Impact factor: 5.742

Review 9.  The spectrum of pseudomembranous enterocolitis and antibiotic-associated diarrhea.

Authors:  Brian W Hurley; Cuong C Nguyen
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2002-10-28

10.  Clinical risk factors for severe Clostridium difficile-associated disease.

Authors:  Timothy J Henrich; Douglas Krakower; Asaf Bitton; Deborah S Yokoe
Journal:  Emerg Infect Dis       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 6.883

View more
  1 in total

1.  Clostridium difficile in patients with nosocomial diarrhea, Northwest of Iran.

Authors:  Yalda Hematyar; Tahereh Pirzadeh; Seyyed Reza Moaddab; Mohammad Ahangarzadeh Rezaee; Mohammad Yousef Memar; Hossein Samadi Kafil
Journal:  Health Promot Perspect       Date:  2020-03-30
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.