Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea: a plea for culture (original) (raw)
Related papers
Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, 1988
An 18-mo evaluation of culture, cytotoxin, and latex testing for Clostridium difficile was performed between July 1, 1985, and December 31, 1986, on 1,536 specimens from 1,406 patients during evaluation of diarrhea. All cases with at least one test positive were investigated for clinical status. There were 144 Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CAD) patients; 139 (97%) were positive by culture, 96 (67%) by cytotoxin, and 98 (68%) by latex testing. In the 1,262 non-CAD patients with diarrheal stool, 89 (7.1%) were positive by culture, 18 (1.4%) by cytotoxin, and 68 (5.4%) by the latex test. No CAD patient was positive by cytotoxin testing only, and two were positive by latex testing only. The culture and cytotoxin positivity were similar to our previous reports of 90-97% and 70-73%, respectively. Latex sensitivity (68%) was comparable to that of cytotoxin testing in this large group of patients (p > 0.5). Overall, in the 1,262 patients without clinical evidence of Clostridium difficile disease, positive tests by latex testing (5.4%) were intermediate between those of culture (7.1%, p < O. 1) and cytotoxin (1.4%, p < 0.001). Enzyme immunoassay for detection of Clostridium difficile ~oxins A and B in patients with antibiotic-associated diarrhoea and colitis. Eur J Clin Microbiol 4:102-107. Aronsson B, Mollby R, Nord CE (1984) Diagnosis and epidemiology of Clostridium difficile enterocolitis in Sweden.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2009
Six hundred diarrheal stool specimens were collected from inpatients and outpatients at local university hospitals for the detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile using three parallel methods, the BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay, the tissue culture cytotoxicity assay, and a commercially available enzyme-linked fluorescence immunoassay (ELFA) (Vidas C. difficile toxin A and B assay; bioMérieux). Toxigenic C. difficile culture was also performed to further clarify discordant results. During a 3-month study period, 58 (9.7%) of the 600 diarrheal samples examined were positive by the BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay, while the Vidas C. difficile toxin A and B assay and the cytotoxicity assay performed directly on stool samples gave 4.7% and 6.3% positivity rates, respectively. In the case of four samples, BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay results were not evaluable at first because of the presence of PCR inhibitors, but upon repeat testing from the frozen lysates, all of these samples proved to be negative. After resolution with toxigenic culture, the cytotoxicity assay proved to be positive in 55 samples (9.2%), while the ELFA was positive in 37 samples (6.2%). Results of culture and repeated cytotoxicity assays emphasized the importance of the culture method, because the use of ELFA or enzyme immunoassay without a culture method may lead to a substantial portion of toxigenic C. difficile strains being missed.
American Journal of Clinical Pathology, 2003
We studied 557 nonduplicate fresh stool specimens from adult patients clinically suspected of having Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. All samples were tested in parallel with an in-house cytotoxin B tissue culture assay (CTA), the C DIFFICILE TOX A/B II test (TA/B; TECHLAB, Blacksburg, VA), and the Triage Micro C DIFFICILE Panel (Biosite Diagnostics, San Diego, CA). The Triage device detects toxin A (TA) and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) simultaneously. Of the specimens, 350 were negative and 95 were positive for all markers. Another 112 specimens yielded discrepant results. The CTA found 143 positive specimens. Results of the components of the Triage and TA/B were compared separately with those of CTA.
Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection in patients with hospital-acquired diarrhea
2018
Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a rapidly emerging infection that may have devastating consequences. Prompt and accurate diagnosis is crucial for management and control. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of C. difficile associated diarrhea among hospitalized patients, and to compare different diagnostic laboratory methods for detection of toxin producing strains in clinical specimens. The study was conducted at a university hospital in Cairo during the period from May 2013 till June 2015. Subjects were under antibiotic therapy and presented with hospital-acquired diarrhea. Four hundred and sixty-five stool specimens were processed by different microbiological methods. C. difficile was recovered in culture in 51 of stool specimens. Of these, 86.3% to 98% were positive for toxin production by 2 different methods. This study showed that antibiotic intake is the major risk factor for development of hospital-acquired diarrhea. We evaluated different microbiological methods for diagnosis of C. difficile. We recommend the use of toxigenic culture as a gold standard for microbiological diagnosis of C. difficile.
Journal of Laboratory Physicians
INTRODUCTION: Clostridium difficile is a Gram-positive spore-bearing anaerobic bacillus increasingly associated with both community- and hospital-acquired colitis and diarrhea. It is the most common identifiable bacterial cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea associated with antibiotic use and one of the most common anaerobic infections. The diagnosis of C. difficile infection includes detection of toxin A/B in stool specimens by direct enzyme immunoassay, culture of pathogen from the stool specimens using a selective agar Cycloserine-Cefoxitin fructose agar (CCFA), tissue culture assay, and detection of glutamate dehydrogenase an enzyme produced by C. difficile. With few reports from India on this disease, the present study was planned to throw more light on the prevalence and utility of laboratory diagnostic methods for C. difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). MATERIAL AND METHODS: After taking approval from the Ethics Committee, 150 patients with antibiotic-associated diarrhea ...
Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 2001
Objective To evaluate six commercially available assays for the detection of Clostridium difficile toxin andlor antigen in stool samples: one latex agglutination test (Culturette brand CDT, Becton Dickinson), two ELISAs (Culturette brand Toxin CD, Becton Dickinson, and Ridascreen C. difficile Toxin AlB, R-biopharm), two chromatographic assays (Clearview C. difficile A, Oxoid, and ColorPac Toxin A, Becton Dickinson) and one enzyme immunoassay for the simultaneous detection of C. difficile common antigen and toxin A (Triage C. difficile Panel, Biosite). Methods Over a period of 3 months, 366 liquid or semi-liquid stool samples were tested using cell-culture cytotoxin assay as standard, ethanol shock stool culture and latex agglutination (Culturette brand CDT). Of these, 78 samples, positive with at least one of these three methods, and 98 randomly selected negative samples were further evaluated using the other five kits. PCR was also performed on positive cultures to confirm the presence of toxin A and B genes. Results Triage C. difficile Panel had the best sensitivity (95%), followed by Clearview C. difficile and ColorPac Toxin A (both 89%), Culturette brand Toxin CD (73%), Ridascreen C. difficile Toxin AlB (57%) and Culturette brand CDT (23%). For Triage, the sensitivity of C. difficile antigen detection was 93%, and the sensitivity oftoxin detection was lower (77%). Most false-positive results were obtained with the Triage C. difficile Panel (25 specimens) and Clearview C. difficile A (20 specimens). Culturette brand CDT had the best specificity (99%); followed by Ridascreen C. difficile Toxin AlB (97%), Culturette brand Toxin CD (95%), ColorPac Toxin A (89%), Clearview C. difficile A (83%) and Triage C. difficile Panel (75%). The positive predictive values ranged from 68% to 94%, and the negative predictive values from 83% to 98%. Conclusions The sensitivity is much higher for Triage and the two new chromatographic assays than for the conventional ElAs. These tests also have a high negative predictive value. For Triage, C. difficile antigen-positive, toxin A-negative results can be obtained; the clinical value of these must be established by additional studies. Overall, the new-generation assays are still less sensitive than the cytotoxin assay; however, they provided sameday results, could be used as a screening test and may be useful in laboratories without tissue-culture facilities. Our results do not allow the recommendation of one single assay for the diagnosis of C. difficile-associated diarrhea. It remains the case that laboratory results must be correlated and interpreted with the clinical presentation of the patient.
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, 2007
We examined the incremental yield of stool culture (with toxin testing on isolates) versus our two-step algorithm for optimal detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile. Per the two-step algorithm, stools were screened for C. difficile-associated glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen and, if positive, tested for toxin by a direct (stool) cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA). In parallel, stools were cultured for C. difficile and tested for toxin by both indirect (isolate) CCNA and conventional PCR if the direct CCNA was negative. The "gold standard" for toxigenic C. difficile was detection of C. difficile by the GDH screen or by culture and toxin production by direct or indirect CCNA. We tested 439 specimens from 439 patients. GDH screening detected all culture-positive specimens. The sensitivity of the two-step algorithm was 77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70 to 84%), and that of culture was 87% (95% CI, 80 to 92%). PCR results correlated completely with those of CCNA testing on isolates (29/29 positive and 32/32 negative, respectively). We conclude that GDH is an excellent screening test and that culture with isolate CCNA testing detects an additional 23% of toxigenic C. difficile missed by direct CCNA. Since culture is tedious and also detects nontoxigenic C. difficile, we conclude that culture is most useful (i) when the direct CCNA is negative but a high clinical suspicion of toxigenic C. difficile remains, (ii) in the evaluation of new diagnostic tests for toxigenic C. difficile (where the best reference standard is essential), and (iii) in epidemiologic studies (where the availability of an isolate allows for strain typing and antimicrobial susceptibility testing).
Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection by toxigenic culture and PCR assay
Iranian Journal of Microbiology, 2018
Background and Objectives: Clostridium difficile is responsible for 15–25% of nosocomial antibiotic associated diarrhea (AAD) cases and all cases of pseudomembranous colitis. C. difficile has two major virulence factors, toxin A (enterotoxin) and toxin B (cytotoxin). The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of C. difficile strains in patients with diarrhea in Babol’ hospitals with toxigenic culture and PCR assay. Materials and Methods: One hundred stool specimens were taken from diarrheal patients in hospitals of the city of Babol. All patients had a history of antibiotic use. The samples were cultured on CCFA medium. In the next stage, toxigenic culture was performed for isolated C. difficile strains. Then, PCR assay was used to identify gdh, tcdA and tcdB genes among isolated C. difficile strains. Results: From the 100 stool samples, eight (8%) samples were positive in C. difficile culture. In toxigenic culture, two (2%) of these strains had cytopathic effects on Vero ...
Rapid detection of Clostridium difficile toxin A in stool specimens
Clinical Microbiology and Infection, 1997
Objective: To evaluate a rapid (15-min) enzyme immunoassay in the format of an individual cassette (ImmunoCard toxin A, Meridian, BMD, Marne-la-Vallee, France) for the detection of Clostridium difficile toxin A in stool specimens.