Department of Graduate Medical Education, Aurora UW Medical Group, Milwaukee, WI, USA.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2012 Jul;87(7):643-51. doi: 10.1016/j.mayocp.2012.02.024.
To assess the usefulness of 2 rapid molecular diagnostic techniques, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), in Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of PCR and LAMP in diagnosis of CDI, including studies that used toxigenic culture or cytotoxicity assay as reference standard.
A search of PubMed and CinAHL medical databases yielded 25 PCR studies, including 11,801 samples that met inclusion criteria and 6 heterogeneous studies that evaluated LAMP. With toxigenic culture as a standard, pooled sensitivity was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.94); specificity, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.94-0.95); and diagnostic odds ratio, 378 (95% CI, 260-547). With cytotoxicity as a standard, pooled sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.90); specificity, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.97-0.98); and diagnostic odds ratio, 370 (95% CI, 226-606).
Polymerase chain reaction is a highly accurate test for identifying CDI. Heterogeneity in LAMP studies did not allow meta-analysis; however, further research into this promising method is warranted.
评估聚合酶链反应(PCR)和环介导等温扩增(LAMP)两种快速分子诊断技术在艰难梭菌感染(CDI)中的应用价值。
我们进行了系统评价和荟萃分析,以评估 PCR 和 LAMP 诊断 CDI 的准确性,包括使用产毒培养或细胞毒性测定作为参考标准的研究。
对 PubMed 和 CinAHL 医学数据库的搜索共得到 25 项 PCR 研究,包括符合纳入标准的 11801 个样本和 6 项评估 LAMP 的异质性研究。以产毒培养为标准,合并敏感性为 0.92(95%置信区间 [CI],0.91-0.94);特异性为 0.94(95% CI,0.94-0.95);诊断比值比为 378(95% CI,260-547)。以细胞毒性测定为标准,合并敏感性为 0.87(95% CI,0.84-0.90);特异性为 0.97(95% CI,0.97-0.98);诊断比值比为 370(95% CI,226-606)。
PCR 是一种高度准确的 CDI 检测方法。LAMP 研究的异质性不允许进行荟萃分析;然而,需要进一步研究这种有前途的方法。