Laboratory Detection of Clostridium difficile in Piglets in Australia

被引:22
|
作者
Knight, Daniel R. [1 ]
Squire, Michele M. [1 ]
Riley, Thomas V. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Australia, Queen Elizabeth II Med Ctr, Sch Pathol & Lab Med, Nedlands, WA, Australia
[2] Queen Elizabeth II Med Ctr, PathWest Lab Med, Dept Microbiol, Nedlands, WA, Australia
关键词
NEONATAL SWINE; TOXIN-A; ENZYME IMMUNOASSAYS; DIAGNOSTIC-TESTS; INFECTION; IDENTIFICATION; PREVALENCE; STRAINS; FECES; AGAR;
D O I
10.1128/JCM.01225-14
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Clostridium difficile is a well-known enteric pathogen of humans and the causative agent of high-morbidity enteritis in piglets aged 1 to 7 days. C. difficile prevalence in Australian piglets is as high as 70%. The current diagnostic assays have been validated only for human infections, and there are no published studies assessing their performance in Australian piglets. We evaluated the suitability of five assays for detecting C. difficile in 157 specimens of piglet feces. The assays included a loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LMIA)-PCR for tcdA (illumigene C. difficile; Meridian), a real-time PCR for tcdB (GeneOhm Cdiff; Becton Dickinson), two-component enzyme immunoassays (EIA) for C. difficile glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) (EIA-GDH) and TcdA/TcdB (EIA-TcdA/TcdB) (C. diff Quik Chek; Alere), and direct culture (DC) (C. difficile chromID agar; bioMerieux). The assays for detection of the organism were compared against enrichment culture (EC), and assays for detection of toxins/toxin genes were compared against EC followed by PCR for toxin genes (toxigenic EC [TEC]). The recovery of C. difficile by EC was 39.5% (n = 62/157), and TEC revealed that 58.1% (n = 36/62) of isolates were positive for at least one toxin gene (tcdA/tcdB). Compared with those for EC/TEC, the sensitivities, specificities, positive predictive values, and negative predictive values were, respectively, as follows: DC, 91.9, 100.0, 100.0, and 95.0%; EIA-GDH, 41.9, 92.6, 78.8, and 71.0%; EIA-TcdA/TcdB, 5.6, 99.2, 66.7, and 77.9%; real-time PCR, 42.9, 96.7, 78.9, and 85.4% and LMIA-PCR, 25.0, 95.9, 64.3, and 81.1%. The performance of the molecular methods was poor, suggesting that the current commercially available assays for diagnosis of C. difficile in humans are not suitable for use in piglets. C. difficile recovery by the DC provides a cost-effective alternative.
引用
收藏
页码:3856 / 3862
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] High prevalence of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in public space lawns in Western Australia
    Moono, Peter
    Lim, Su Chen
    Riley, Thomas V.
    SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2017, 7
  • [42] Clostridium difficile Community Clostridium difficile
    Rangaiah, Jayakeerthi
    Wilks, Mark
    Millar, Michael
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2009, 338
  • [43] Is the prevalence of Clostridium difficile in animals underestimated?
    Blanco, Jose L.
    Alvarez-Perez, Sergio
    Garcia, Marta E.
    VETERINARY JOURNAL, 2013, 197 (03) : 694 - 698
  • [44] Detection of Clostridium difficile in Feces of Asymptomatic Patients Admitted to the Hospital
    Terveer, Elisabeth M.
    Crobach, Monique J. T.
    Sanders, Ingrid M. J. G.
    Vos, Margreet C.
    Verduin, Cees M.
    Kuijper, Ed J.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2017, 55 (02) : 403 - 411
  • [45] Diagnostic trends in Clostridium difficile detection in Finnish microbiology laboratories
    Kononen, Eija
    Rasinpera, Marja
    Virolainen, Anni
    Mentula, Silja
    Lyytikainen, Outi
    ANAEROBE, 2009, 15 (06) : 261 - 265
  • [46] Clinical Utility of Laboratory Detection of Clostridium difficile Strain BI/NAP1/027
    Kociolek, Larry K.
    Gerding, Dale N.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2016, 54 (01) : 19 - 24
  • [47] Clostridium difficile and Clostridium perfringens from wild carnivore species in Brazil
    Silveira Silva, Rodrigo Otavio
    D'Elia, Mirella Lauria
    Tostes Teixeira, Erika Procopio
    Lithg Pereira, Pedro Lucio
    de Magalhaes Soares, Danielle Ferreira
    Cavalcanti, Alvaro Roberto
    Kocuvan, Aleksander
    Rupnik, Maja
    Quagliatto Santos, Andre Luiz
    Oliveira Junior, Carlos Augusto
    Faria Lobato, Francisco Carlos
    ANAEROBE, 2014, 28 : 207 - 211
  • [48] Clostridium difficile infection
    Groschel, DHM
    CRITICAL REVIEWS IN CLINICAL LABORATORY SCIENCES, 1996, 33 (03) : 203 - 245
  • [49] Clostridium difficile Guidelines
    Collins, Deirdre A.
    Riley, Thomas V.
    CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2018, 67 (10) : 1639 - 1639
  • [50] Clostridium difficile and the microbiota
    Seekatz, Anna M.
    Young, Vincent B.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL INVESTIGATION, 2014, 124 (10) : 4182 - 4189