Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid, Box 8051, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Aug;49(8):2887-93. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00891-11. Epub 2011 Jun 22.
Asymptomatic Clostridium difficile colonization is common in hospitalized patients. Existing C. difficile assay comparisons lack data on severity of diarrhea or patient outcomes, limiting the ability to interpret their results in regard to the diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI). The objective of this study was to measure how including patient presentation with the C. difficile assay result impacted assay performance to diagnose CDI. Stool specimens from 150 patients that met inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected. Nine methods to detect C. difficile in stool were evaluated. All patients were interviewed prospectively to assess diarrhea severity. We then assessed how different reference standards, with and without the inclusion of patient presentation, impact the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the assays to diagnose CDI. There were minimal changes in sensitivity; however, specificity was significantly lower for the assays Tox A/B II, C. diff Chek-60, BD GeneOhm Cdiff, Xpert C. difficile, and Illumigene C. difficile and for toxigenic culture (P was <0.01 for all except Tox A/B II from fresh stool, for which the P value was 0.016) when the reference standard was recovery of toxigenic C. difficile from stool plus the presence of clinically significant diarrhea compared to when the reference standard was having at least four assays positive while ignoring diarrhea severity. There were 15 patients whose assay result was reported as negative but subsequently found to be positive by at least four assays in the comparison. None suffered from any CDI-related adverse events. In conclusion, clinical presentation is important when interpreting C. difficile diagnostic assays.
无症状艰难梭菌定植在住院患者中很常见。现有的艰难梭菌检测方法比较缺乏关于腹泻严重程度或患者结局的数据,限制了其在艰难梭菌感染(CDI)诊断方面结果的解释能力。本研究的目的是衡量在艰难梭菌检测结果中纳入患者表现如何影响检测诊断 CDI 的性能。选择了符合纳入和排除标准的 150 名患者的粪便标本。评估了 9 种检测粪便中艰难梭菌的方法。所有患者均前瞻性访谈以评估腹泻严重程度。然后,我们评估了不同的参考标准,包括和不包括患者表现,如何影响检测诊断 CDI 的敏感性、特异性以及阳性和阴性预测值。敏感性的变化很小;然而,当参考标准是从粪便中回收产毒艰难梭菌加上存在临床显著腹泻时,Tox A/B II、C. diff Chek-60、BD GeneOhm Cdiff、Xpert C. difficile 和 Illumigene C. difficile 检测以及产毒培养的特异性显著降低(除了新鲜粪便中的 Tox A/B II 外,所有检测的 P 值均<0.01,而 Tox A/B II 的 P 值为 0.016),而当参考标准是至少有四个检测呈阳性而忽略腹泻严重程度时。有 15 名患者的检测结果报告为阴性,但在比较中至少有四个检测呈阳性。没有患者遭受任何与 CDI 相关的不良事件。总之,在解释艰难梭菌诊断检测时,临床表现很重要。