Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection by toxin detection kits: a systematic review

被引:253
作者
Planche, Tim [1 ,2 ]
Aghaizu, Adamma [3 ]
Holliman, Richard [1 ,2 ]
Riley, Peter [1 ,2 ]
Poloniecki, Jan [3 ]
Breathnach, Aodhan [1 ,4 ]
Krishna, Sanjeev [1 ]
机构
[1] St Georges Univ London, Ctr Infect, Div Cellular & Mol Med, London SW17 0RE, England
[2] St George Hosp, Dept Med Microbiol, London, England
[3] St Georges Univ London, Dept Community Hlth Sci, London SW17 0RE, England
[4] St George Hosp, Dept Med Microbiol, Hlth Protect Agcy Collaborating Ctr, London, England
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S1473-3099(08)70233-0
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Clostridium difficile can be a fatal hospital-acquired infection and its prevalence has increased. Accurate diagnosis of C difficile is essential for patient management, infection control, and for defining its epidemiology. We did a systematic review of commonly used commercial assays for detection of C difficile toxin (CDT) A and B in stool samples. By comparison of detection of CDT in cell culture with or without selective culture for C difficile, the median sensitivities and specificities (IQR) were as follows: Meridian Premier 0.95 (0.86-0.97) and 0.97 (0.95-0.98), TechLab Tox A/B II 0.83 (0.82-0.85) and 0.99 (0.98-1.00), TechLab Tox A/B Quik Chek 0.84 (0.81-0.87) and 1.00 (0.99-1.00), Remel Xpect 0.82 (0.75-0.89) and 0.96 (0.95-0.98), Meridian Immunocard 0.90 (0.84-0.92) and 0.99 (0.98-1.00), and BioMerieux VIDAS 0.76 and 0.93. if the prevalence of CDT A and B in stool samples is relatively low (<10%), the positive predictive value of these assays is unacceptably low (eg, <50% in some circumstances) and will vary depending on the assay and number of samples tested. This low positive predictive value impinges on clinical management, outbreaks, and makes epidemiological data unreliable. To improve diagnosis, we suggest a two-stage testing strategy for C difficile toxin with an initial highly sensitive rapid screening test to identify positive samples that are then confirmed by a reference method.
引用
收藏
页码:777 / 784
页数:8
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]  
ALCABASA R, 2007, P AM SOC MICR 107 GE
[2]   The diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea:: comparison of Triage® C-difficile panel, EIA for Tox A/B and cytotoxin assays [J].
Alfa, MJ ;
Swan, B ;
VanDekerkhove, B ;
Pang, P ;
Harding, GKM .
DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2002, 43 (04) :257-263
[3]   STATISTICS NOTES - DIAGNOSTIC-TESTS-1 - SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY .3. [J].
ALTMAN, DG ;
BLAND, JM .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1994, 308 (6943) :1552-1552
[4]  
[Anonymous], COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
[5]  
[Anonymous], CLOSTR DIFF INF DEAL
[6]   A European survey of diagnostic methods and testing protocols for Clostridium difficile [J].
Barbut, F ;
Delmée, M ;
Brazier, JS ;
Petit, JC ;
Poxton, IR ;
Rupnik, M ;
Lalande, V ;
Schneider, C ;
Mastrantonio, P ;
Alonso, R ;
Kuipjer, E ;
Tvede, M .
CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION, 2003, 9 (10) :989-996
[7]   Antibiotic-associated diarrhea [J].
Bartlett, JG .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 346 (05) :334-339
[8]   Clinical recognition and diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection [J].
Bartlett, John G. ;
Gerding, Dale N. .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2008, 46 :S12-S18
[9]  
BENAVENTE A, 2002, P 12 EUR C CLIN MICR
[10]  
BERG RJ, 2005, P 15 EUR C CLIN MICR