Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Compared to Real-Time PCR and Enzyme Immunoassay for Toxigenic Clostridium difficile Detection

被引:55
作者
Boyanton, Bobby L., Jr. [1 ,2 ]
Sural, Preethi [3 ]
Loomis, Caroline R. [1 ]
Pesta, Christine [1 ]
Gonzalez-Krellwitz, Laura [1 ]
Robinson-Dunn, Barbara [1 ,2 ]
Riska, Paul [4 ]
机构
[1] Beaumont Hosp, Dept Clin Pathol, Royal Oak, MI USA
[2] Oakland Univ, William Beaumont Sch Med, Rochester, MI 48063 USA
[3] Beaumont Hosp, Div Infect Dis, Royal Oak, MI USA
[4] Montefiore Med Ctr, Albert Einstein Coll Med, Bronx, NY 10467 USA
关键词
POLYMERASE-CHAIN-REACTION; 2-STEP ALGORITHM; GLUTAMATE-DEHYDROGENASE; STOOL SPECIMENS; TOXIN; INFECTION; DIAGNOSIS; ASSAY; DIARRHEA; CYTOTOXIN;
D O I
10.1128/JCM.01014-11
中图分类号
Q93 [微生物学];
学科分类号
071005 ; 100705 ;
摘要
Clostridium difficile infection is the primary cause of health care-associated diarrhea. While most laboratories have been using rapid antigen tests for detecting C. difficile toxins, they have poor sensitivity; newer molecular methods offer rapid results with high test sensitivity and specificity. This study was designed to compare the performances of two molecular assays (Meridian illumigene and BD GeneOhm) and two antigen assays (Wampole Quik Chek Complete and TechLab Tox A/B II) to detect toxigenic C. difficile. Fecal specimens from hospitalized patients (n = 139) suspected of having C. difficile infection were tested by the four assays. Nine specimens were positive and 109 were negative by all four methods. After discrepant analysis by toxigenic culture (n = 21), the total numbers of stool specimens classified as positive and negative for toxigenic C. difficile were 21 (15%) and 118 (85%), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were as follows: GeneOhm (95.2%, 100%, 100%, and 99.2%), illumigene (95.2%, 96.6%, 83.3%, and 99.2%), Tox A/B II (52.4%, 97.5%, 78.6%, and 92.4%), and Quik Chek Complete (47.6%, 100%, 100%, and 91.9%). The illumigene assay performed comparably to the GeneOhm assay with a slight decrease in test specificity; the sensitivities of both far exceeded those of the antigen assays. The clinical characteristics of the concordant and discrepant study patients were similar, including stool consistency and frequency. In the era of rapid molecular-based tests for toxigenic C. difficile, toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) should no longer be considered the standard of care.
引用
收藏
页码:640 / 645
页数:6
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]   Prevalence and genetic characterization of toxin A variant strains of Clostridium difficile among adults and children with diarrhea in France [J].
Barbut, F ;
Lalande, V ;
Burghoffer, B ;
Thien, HV ;
Grimprel, E ;
Petit, JC .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2002, 40 (06) :2079-2083
[2]   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) [J].
Cohen, Stuart H. ;
Gerding, Dale N. ;
Johnson, Stuart ;
Kelly, Ciaran P. ;
Loo, Vivian G. ;
McDonald, L. Clifford ;
Pepin, Jacques ;
Wilcox, Mark H. .
INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2010, 31 (05) :431-455
[3]  
Coyle K, 2010, 110 GEN M AM SOC MIC
[4]   Clinical Clostridium difficile: Clonality and Pathogenicity Locus Diversity [J].
Dingle, Kate E. ;
Griffiths, David ;
Didelot, Xavier ;
Evans, Jessica ;
Vaughan, Alison ;
Kachrimanidou, Melina ;
Stoesser, Nicole ;
Jolley, Keith A. ;
Golubchik, Tanya ;
Harding, Rosalind M. ;
Peto, Tim E. ;
Fawley, Warren ;
Walker, A. Sarah ;
Wilcox, Mark ;
Crook, Derrick W. .
PLOS ONE, 2011, 6 (05)
[5]   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 [J].
Doing, Kirk M. ;
Hintz, Marilyn S. ;
Keefe, Calvin ;
Horne, Sarah ;
LeVasseur, Shelby ;
Kulikowski, Martha L. .
DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2010, 66 (02) :129-134
[6]   Impact of Clinical Symptoms on Interpretation of Diagnostic Assays for Clostridium difficile Infections [J].
Dubberke, Erik R. ;
Han, Zhuolin ;
Bobo, Linda ;
Hink, Tiffany ;
Lawrence, Brenda ;
Copper, Susan ;
Hoppe-Bauer, Joan ;
Burnham, Carey-Ann D. ;
Dunne, William Michael, Jr. .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2011, 49 (08) :2887-2893
[7]   Review of Current Literature on the Economic Burden of Clostridium difficile Infection [J].
Dubberke, Erik R. ;
Wertheimer, Albert I. .
INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2009, 30 (01) :57-66
[8]   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].
Eastwood, Kerrie ;
Else, Patrick ;
Charlett, Andre ;
Wilcox, Mark .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY, 2009, 47 (10) :3211-3217
[9]   Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in diarrheal stools by rapid real-time polymerase chain reaction [J].
Goldenberg, Simon D. ;
Dieringer, Thomas ;
French, Gary L. .
DIAGNOSTIC MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASE, 2010, 67 (03) :304-307
[10]   National point prevalence of Clostridium difficile in US health care facility inpatients, 2008 [J].
Jarvis, William R. ;
Schlosser, JoAnn ;
Jarvis, Ashley A. ;
Chinn, Raymond Y. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INFECTION CONTROL, 2009, 37 (04) :263-270