Combination of culture, antigen and toxin detection, and cytotoxin neutralization assay for optimal Clostridium difficile diagnostic testing

被引:3
作者
Alfa, Michelle J. [1 ,2 ]
Sepehri, Shadi [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Manitoba, Dept Med Microbiol, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
[2] Diagnost Serv Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada
关键词
Laboratory diagnostic algorithm; Optimal laboratory diagnosis; Toxigenic Clostridium difficile; ENZYME-IMMUNOASSAY; GLUTAMATE-DEHYDROGENASE; COMMON ANTIGEN; ALGORITHM; INFECTION; A/B; PANEL; EIA;
D O I
10.1155/2013/934945
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: There has been a growing interest in developing an appropriate laboratory diagnostic algorithm for Clostridium difficile, mainly as a result of increases in both the number and severity of cases of C difficile infection in the past decade. A C difficile diagnostic algorithm is necessary because diagnostic kits, mostly for the detection of toxins A and B or glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen, are not sufficient as stand-alone assays for optimal diagnosis of C difficile infection. In addition, conventional reference methods for C difficile detection (eg, toxigenic culture and cytotoxin neutralization [CTN] assays) are not routinely practiced in diagnostic laboratory settings. OBJECTIVE: To review the four-step algorithm used at Diagnostic Services of Manitoba sites for the laboratory diagnosis of toxigenic C difficile. RESULT: One year of retrospective C difficile data using the proposed algorithm was reported. Of 5695 stool samples tested, 9.1% (n=517) had toxigenic C difficile. Sixty per cent (310 of 517) of toxigenic C difficile stools were detected following the first two steps of the algorithm. CTN confirmation of GDH-positive, toxin A- and B-negative assays resulted in detection of an additional 37.7% (198 of 517) of toxigenic C difficile. Culture of the third specimen, from patients who had two previous negative specimens, detected an additional 2.32% (12 of 517) of toxigenic C difficile samples. DISCUSSION: Using GDH antigen as the screening and toxin A and B as confirmatory test for C difficile, 85% of specimens were reported negative or positive within 4 h. Without CTN confirmation for GDH antigen and toxin A and B discordant results, 37% (195 of 517) of toxigenic C difficile stools would have been missed. Following the algorithm, culture was needed for only 2.72% of all specimens submitted for C difficile testing. CONCLUSION: The overview of the data illustrated the significance of each stage of this four-step C difficile algorithm and emphasized the value of using CTN assay and culture as parts of an algorithm that ensures accurate diagnosis of toxigenic C difficile.
引用
收藏
页码:89 / 92
页数:4
相关论文
共 20 条
  • [1] The diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea:: comparison of Triage® C-difficile panel, EIA for Tox A/B and cytotoxin assays
    Alfa, MJ
    Swan, B
    VanDekerkhove, B
    Pang, P
    Harding, GKM
    [J]. DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2002, 43 (04) : 257 - 263
  • [2] [Anonymous], PRACT GUID DOC LAB D
  • [3] Comparison of Five Assays for Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxin
    Chapin, Kimberle C.
    Dickenson, Roberta A.
    Wu, Fongman
    Andrea, Sarah B.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR DIAGNOSTICS, 2011, 13 (04) : 395 - 400
  • [4] Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile Infection in Adults: 2010 Update by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA)
    Cohen, Stuart H.
    Gerding, Dale N.
    Johnson, Stuart
    Kelly, Ciaran P.
    Loo, Vivian G.
    McDonald, L. Clifford
    Pepin, Jacques
    Wilcox, Mark H.
    [J]. INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 31 (05) : 431 - 455
  • [5] Evaluation of the Fully Automated BD MAX Cdiff and Xpert C. difficile Assays for Direct Detection of Clostridium difficile in Stool Specimens
    Dalpke, Alexander H.
    Hofko, Marjeta
    Zorn, Markus
    Zimmermann, Stefan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2013, 51 (06) : 1906 - 1908
  • [6] Reevaluation of the Premier Clostridium difficile toxin A and B immunoassay with comparison to glutamate dehydrogenase common antigen testing evaluating Bartels cytotoxin and Prodesse ProGastro™ Cd polymerase chain reaction as confirmatory procedures
    Doing, Kirk M.
    Hintz, Marilyn S.
    Keefe, Calvin
    Horne, Sarah
    LeVasseur, Shelby
    Kulikowski, Martha L.
    [J]. DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2010, 66 (02) : 129 - 134
  • [7] Comparison of Nine Commercially Available Clostridium difficile Toxin Detection Assays, a Real-Time PCR Assay for C. difficile tcdB, and a Glutamate Dehydrogenase Detection Assay to Cytotoxin Testing and Cytotoxigenic Culture Methods
    Eastwood, Kerrie
    Else, Patrick
    Charlett, Andre
    Wilcox, Mark
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2009, 47 (10) : 3211 - 3217
  • [8] Rapid and reliable diagnostic algorithm for detection of Clostridium difficile
    Fenner, Lukas
    Widmer, Andreas F.
    Goy, Gisela
    Rudin, Sonja
    Frei, Reno
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2008, 46 (01) : 328 - 330
  • [9] New definitions will help, but cultures are critical for resolving unanswered questions about Clostridium difficile
    Gerding, Dale N.
    [J]. INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2007, 28 (02) : 113 - 115
  • [10] Clostridium difficile 30 years on: what has, or has not, changed and why?
    Gerding, Dale N.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS, 2009, 33 : S2 - S8