Clostridioides difficile in Outpatients: Application of a Diagnostic Algorithm Recommended by the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases

门诊患者艰难梭菌感染:欧洲临床微生物学和传染病学会推荐的诊断算法的应用

阅读:1

Abstract

This study aimed at evaluating in outpatients an algorithm for the laboratory diagnosis of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection (CDI), i.e., enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) detecting bacterial glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B, followed by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) analyses of samples with discordant EIA results. In total, 9802 examinations of stool samples by GDH and toxin EIAs performed in 7263 outpatients and 488 inpatients were analyzed retrospectively. Samples with discordant EIA results had been tested by a commercially available PCR assay detecting genes of the C. difficile-specific triose phosphate isomerase (tpi) and toxin B (tcdB). Concordant EIA results (686 C. difficile-positive, 8121 negative) were observed for 8807 (89.8%; 95% CI, 89.2-90.4%) samples. Of 958 samples with discordant EIA results, 895 were analyzed using PCR and 580 of 854 GDH-positive/borderline, toxin-negative samples (67.9%; 95% CI, 64.7-71.0%) were positive for tpi and tcdB, while 274 samples (32.1%; 95% CI, 29.0-35.3%) were tcdB-negative. In contrast, 35 of 41 GDH-negative, toxin-positive/borderline samples (85.4%; 95% CI, 71.2-93.5%) were tcdB-negative. Still, 6 samples (14.6%; 95% CI, 6.5-28.8%) yielded positive PCR results for both genes. In conclusion, around 90% of the samples were analyzed appropriately by only applying EIAs. Approximately one third of the PCR-analyzed samples were tcdB-negative; thus, patients most likely did not require CDI treatment.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。