Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with Clostridium difficile infection diagnosed by PCR versus a three-step algorithm

Clinical Microbiology and Infection

Volumn 20, Issue 10, 2014, Pages 1067-1073

  Beaulieu, C ^a,b   Dionne, L L ^b   Julien, A S ^c   Longtin, Y ^a,b,c,d  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^b LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Clostridium difficile; PCR; Clinical features; Laboratory diagnosis; Patient outcome

Indexed keywords

LAXATIVE; METRONIDAZOLE; VANCOMYCIN;

AGED; ALGORITHM; ANTIBIOTIC THERAPY; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL LOAD; CLINICAL FEATURE; CLINICAL STUDY; CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE INFECTION; COHORT ANALYSIS; COLON RESECTION; COLONY FORMING UNIT; CYTOTOXICITY ASSAY; DIARRHEA; ENTERIC FEEDING; ENZYME IMMUNOASSAY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HOSPITAL DISCHARGE; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE UNIT; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTESTINE FUNCTION; LENGTH OF STAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORTALITY; NEUTROPHIL COUNT; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECURRENT DISEASE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TREATMENT DURATION; CLOSTRIDIUM INFECTIONS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FECES; GENETICS; IMMUNOLOGICAL PROCEDURES; ISOLATION AND PURIFICATION; MICROBIOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PEPTOCLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE; PROCEDURES; PROGNOSIS; STATISTICAL MODEL; VERY ELDERLY;

CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE; CLOSTRIDIUM INFECTIONS; FECES; HUMANS; IMMUNOLOGIC TESTS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION; PROGNOSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES;

EID: 84913614036     PISSN: 1198743X     EISSN: 14690691     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1469-0691.12676     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Planche T, Wilcox M. Reference assays for Clostridium difficile infection: one or two gold standards? J Clin Pathol 2010; 64: 1-5.
2. Cohen SH, Gerding DN, Johnson S et al. 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). Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010; 31: 431-455.
3. Dubberke E, Wertheimer AI. Review of current literature on the economic burden of Clostridium difficile infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009; 30: 57-66.
4. Wiegand PN, Nathwani D, Wilcox MH et al. Clinical and economic burden of Clostridium difficile infection in Europe: a systematic review of healthcare-facility-acquired infection. J Hosp Infect 2012; 81: 1-14.
5. Goldenberg SD, French GL. Diagnostic testing for Clostridium difficile: a comprehensive survey of laboratories in England. J Hosp Infect 2011; 79: 4-7.
6. Wilcox MH, Planche T, Fang FC. What is the current role of algorithmic approaches for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection? J Clin Microbiol 2010; 48: 4347-4353.
7. Planche T, Aghaizu A, Holliman R et al. Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection by toxin detection kits: a systematic review. Lancet Infect Dis 2008; 8: 777-784.
8. Crobach MJT, Dekkers OM, Wilcox MH, Kuijper EJ. European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID): data review and recommendations for diagnosing Clostridium difficile-infection (CDI). Clin Microbiol Infect 2009; 15: 1053-1066.
9. Peterson LR, Manson RU, Paule SM et al. Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in stool samples by real-time polymerase chain reaction for the diagnosis of C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45: 1152-1160.
10. Deshpande A, Pasupuleti V, Rolston DDK et al. Diagnostic accuracy of real-time polymerase chain reaction in detection of Clostridium difficile in the stool samples of patients with suspected Clostridium difficile infection: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 53: e81-e90.
11. Eastwood K, Else P, Charlett A, Wilcox M. 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. J Clin Microbiol 2009; 47: 3211-3217.
12. Kaltsas A, Simon M, Unruh LH et al. Clinical and laboratory characteristics of Clostridium difficile infection in patients with discordant diagnostic test results. J Clin Microbiol 2012; 50: 1303-1307.
13. de Jong E, de Jong AS, Bartels CJM et al. Clinical and laboratory evaluation of a real-time PCR for Clostridium difficile toxin A and B genes. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2012; 31: 2219-2225.
14. Polage CR, Chin DL, Leslie JL et al. Outcomes in patients tested for Clostridium difficile toxins. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2012; 74: 369-373.
15. Guerrero DM, Chou C, Jury LA et al. Clinical and infection control implications of Clostridium difficile infection with negative enzyme immunoassay for toxin. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 53: 287-290.
16. Longtin Y, Trottier S, Brochu G et al. Impact of the type of diagnostic assay on Clostridium difficile infection and complication rates in a mandatory reporting program. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 56: 67-73.
17. Quebec National Institute of Public Health (INSPQ). Protocol for surveillance of Clostridium difficile associated diarrhea in Quebec acute care hospitals (version 2) 2010. http://www.inspq.qc.ca/aspx/docs/InfectionsNosocomiales/SPIN/GuidemedicalDACD_v1.8.pdf.
18. Dionne L-L, Raymond F, Corbeil J et al. Correlation between Clostridium difficile bacterial load, commercial real-time PCR cycle thresholds, and results of diagnostic tests based on enzyme immunoassay and cell culture cytotoxicity assay. J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51: 3624-3630.
19. Katz MH. Multivariable analysis, a practical guide for clinicians and public health researchers, 3rd edn. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
20. Planche TD, Davies KA, Coen PG et al. Differences in outcome according to Clostridium difficile testing method: a prospective multicentre diagnostic validation study of C. difficile infection. Lancet Infect Dis 2013; 13: 936-945.
21. Humphries RM, Uslan DZ, Rubin Z. Performance of Clostridium difficile toxin enzyme immunoassay and nucleic acid amplification tests stratified by patient disease severity. J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51: 869-873.
22. Orendi JM, Monnery DJ, Manzoor S, Hawkey PM. A two-stage algorithm for Clostridium difficile including PCR: can we replace the toxin EIA? J Hosp Infect 2012; 80: 82-84.
23. Viala C, Le Monnier A, Maataoui N et al. Comparison of commercial molecular assays for toxigenic Clostridium difficile detection in stools: BD GeneOhm Cdiff, XPert C. difficile and illumigene C. difficile. J Microbiol Methods 2012; 90: 83-85.
24. Su W-Y, Mercer J, Van Hal SJ, Maley M. Clostridium difficile testing: have we got it right? J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51: 377-378.
25. Lungulescu OA, Cao W, Gatskevich E, Tlhabano L, Stratidis JG. CSI: a severity index for Clostridium difficile infection at the time of admission. J Hosp Infect 2011; 79: 151-154.
26. Drew RJ, Boyle B. RUWA scoring system: a novel predictive tool for the identification of patients at high risk for complications from Clostridium difficile infection. J Hosp Infect 2009; 71: 93-94. - author reply 94-5.
27. Kyne L, Warny M, Qamar A, Kelly CP. Asymptomatic carriage of Clostridium difficile and serum levels of IgG antibody against toxin A. N Engl J Med 2000; 342: 390-397.
28. LaSala PR, Ekhmimi T, Hill AK, Farooqi I, Perrotta PL. Quantitative fecal lactoferrin in toxin-positive and toxin-negative Clostridium difficile specimens. J Clin Microbiol 2013; 51: 311-313.
29. Tenover FC, Novak-Weekley S, Woods CW et al. Impact of strain type on detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile: comparison of molecular diagnostic and enzyme immunoassay approaches. J Clin Microbiol 2010; 48: 3719-3724.