Literature DB >> 33204744

An Analysis of Clostridium difficile Environmental Contamination During and After Treatment for C difficile Infection.

Kerrie Davies1, Damian Mawer2, A Sarah Walker3,4, Claire Berry1, Timothy Planche5, Phil Stanley6, Simon Goldenberg7,8, Jonathan Sandoe1, Mark H Wilcox1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Lower Clostridium difficile spore counts in feces from C difficile infection (CDI) patients treated with fidaxomicin versus vancomycin have been observed. We aimed to determine whether environmental contamination is lower in patients treated with fidaxomicin compared with those treated with vancomycin/metronidazole.
METHODS: The CDI cases were recruited at 4 UK hospitals (Leeds, Bradford, and London [2 centers]). Environmental samples (5 room sites) were taken pretreatment and at 2-3, 4-5, 6-8, and 9-12 days of treatment, end of treatment (EOT), and post-EOT. Fecal samples were collected at diagnosis and as often as produced thereafter. Swabs/feces were cultured for C difficile; percentage of C difficile-positive samples and C difficile bioburden were compared between different treatment arms at each time point.
RESULTS: Pre-EOT (n = 244), there was a significant reduction in environmental contamination (≥1 site positive) around fidaxomicin versus vancomycin/metronidazole recipients at days 4-5 (30% vs 50% recipients, P = .04) and at days 9-12 (22% vs 49%, P = .005). This trend was consistently seen at all other timepoints, but it was not statistically significant. No differences were seen between treatment groups post-EOT (n = 76). Fidaxomicin-associated fecal positivity rates and colony counts were consistently lower than those for vancomycin/metronidazole from days 4 to 5 of treatment (including post-EOT); however, the only significant difference was in positivity rate at days 9-12 (15% vs 55%, P = .03).
CONCLUSIONS: There were significant reductions in C difficile recovery from both feces and the environment around fidaxomicin versus vancomycin/metronidazole recipients. Therefore, fidaxomicin treatment may lower the C difficile transmission risk by reducing excretion and environmental contamination.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clostridium difficile infection; environmental contamination; fidaxomicin

Year:  2020        PMID: 33204744      PMCID: PMC7651500          DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofaa362

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis        ISSN: 2328-8957            Impact factor:   3.835


  22 in total

1.  Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  Thomas J Louie; Mark A Miller; Kathleen M Mullane; Karl Weiss; Arnold Lentnek; Yoav Golan; Sherwood Gorbach; Pamela Sears; Youe-Kong Shue
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-02-03       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Bacterial spore structures and their protective role in biocide resistance.

Authors:  M J Leggett; G McDonnell; S P Denyer; P Setlow; J-Y Maillard
Journal:  J Appl Microbiol       Date:  2012-05-31       Impact factor: 3.772

3.  PCR targeted to the 16S-23S rRNA gene intergenic spacer region of Clostridium difficile and construction of a library consisting of 116 different PCR ribotypes.

Authors:  S L Stubbs; J S Brazier; G L O'Neill; B I Duerden
Journal:  J Clin Microbiol       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 5.948

Review 4.  How to eradicate Clostridium difficile from the environment.

Authors:  F Barbut
Journal:  J Hosp Infect       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 3.926

5.  Nosocomial acquisition of Clostridium difficile infection.

Authors:  L V McFarland; M E Mulligan; R Y Kwok; W E Stamm
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1989-01-26       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Postdischarge decontamination of MRSA, VRE, and Clostridium difficile isolation rooms using 2 commercially available automated ultraviolet-C-emitting devices.

Authors:  Titus Wong; Tracey Woznow; Mike Petrie; Elena Murzello; Allison Muniak; Amin Kadora; Elizabeth Bryce
Journal:  Am J Infect Control       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 2.918

7.  Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for infection with Clostridium difficile in Europe, Canada, and the USA: a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Oliver A Cornely; Derrick W Crook; Roberto Esposito; André Poirier; Michael S Somero; Karl Weiss; Pamela Sears; Sherwood Gorbach
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 25.071

8.  Asymptomatic carriers are a potential source for transmission of epidemic and nonepidemic Clostridium difficile strains among long-term care facility residents.

Authors:  Michelle M Riggs; Ajay K Sethi; Trina F Zabarsky; Elizabeth C Eckstein; Robin L P Jump; Curtis J Donskey
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2007-09-04       Impact factor: 9.079

Review 9.  Recurrent Clostridium difficile infection: a review of risk factors, treatments, and outcomes.

Authors:  Stuart Johnson
Journal:  J Infect       Date:  2009-04-05       Impact factor: 6.072

10.  Comparison of clinical and microbiological response to treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated disease with metronidazole and vancomycin.

Authors:  Wafa N Al-Nassir; Ajay K Sethi; Michelle M Nerandzic; Greg S Bobulsky; Robin L P Jump; Curtis J Donskey
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 9.079

View more
  1 in total

1.  The Impact of Infection Versus Colonization on Clostridioides difficile Environmental Contamination in Hospitalized Patients With Diarrhea.

Authors:  Bobby G Warren; Nicholas A Turner; Rachel Addison; Alicia Nelson; Aaron Barrett; Bechtler Addison; Amanda Graves; Becky Smith; Sarah S Lewis; David J Weber; Emily E Sickbert-Bennett; Deverick J Anderson
Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis       Date:  2022-02-09       Impact factor: 3.835

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.