• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

使用艰难梭菌 PCR 检测法检测不确定 tcdB:一项回顾性队列研究。

Indeterminate tcdB using a Clostridium difficile PCR assay: a retrospective cohort study.

机构信息

Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, University Health Network/Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Jul 16;13:324. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-324.

DOI:10.1186/1471-2334-13-324
PMID:23865713
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3718660/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

C. difficile (CD) real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for toxin B gene (tcdB) is more sensitive, and reduces turnaround time when compared to toxin immunoassay. We noted typical amplification curves with high tcdB cycle thresholds (Ct) and low endpoints (Ept) that are labeled negative by the Xpert(®) C. difficile assay (Cepheid) and undertook this study to determine their significance.

METHODS

We defined an indeterminate CD assay result as detection of a typical PCR amplification curve with an Ept >10 that was interpreted as negative by the Xpert(®) assay. Samples with indeterminate Xpert(®) result were collected for 5 months and retested by Xpert(®), cultured for toxigenic CD, and isolates subjected to PCR ribotyping, detection of toxin genes and multilocus variable-number tandem repeat analysis (MLVA) typing. Chart reviews were completed to assess if patients met the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America and the Infectious Diseases Society of America CD infection (CDI) clinical case definition. Illness severity was compared with tcdB Ct and culture results.

RESULTS

During the 5-month study period, 48/3620 (1%) of specimens were indeterminate and 387/3620 (11%) were positive. Of the 48 patients with indeterminate results, 39 (81%) met the clinical case definition of CDI, and 7 of these (18%) met criteria for severe CDI. Toxigenic stool cultures were positive for 86% (6/7) of patients with severe CDI, 19% (6/32) of patients with non-severe CDI, and 44% (4/9) of patients who did not meet the clinical case definition of CDI (p = 0.002). Lower tcdB Ct and higher Ept were associated with greater likelihood of toxigenic culture positivity (p = 0.03) and more severe symptoms (p = 0.06). Indeterminate results were not associated with a particular technologist or instrument module, or CD strain type.

CONCLUSIONS

A subset of specimens (1%) using the Xpert(®) C. difficile assay have typical amplification curves and are interpreted as negative. At least one-third of these results are associated with positive CD culture. The mechanism of these indeterminate results is not technique-related, equipment-related, or due to particular CD strains. Clinicians should be aware that even PCR testing has the potential to miss CDI cases and further highlights the importance of clinical context when interpreting results.

摘要

背景

与毒素免疫检测相比,艰难梭菌实时聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测毒素 B 基因(tcdB)更为敏感,且能缩短检测周转时间。我们发现,Xpert®艰难梭菌检测(Cepheid)标记为阴性的高 tcdB 循环阈值(Ct)和低终点(Ept)的典型扩增曲线很多,为此我们进行了这项研究以确定其意义。

方法

我们将 Xpert®检测结果不确定的艰难梭菌检测定义为检测到典型的 PCR 扩增曲线,Ept >10,而 Xpert®检测将其解释为阴性。收集了 5 个月的 Xpert®检测结果不确定的样本,再次进行 Xpert®检测、培养产毒艰难梭菌,并对分离株进行 PCR 核糖体分型、毒素基因检测和多位点可变数串联重复分析(MLVA)分型。完成图表回顾以评估患者是否符合美国医疗保健流行病学学会和美国传染病学会艰难梭菌感染(CDI)临床病例定义。比较疾病严重程度与 tcdB Ct 和培养结果。

结果

在 5 个月的研究期间,3620 份标本中有 48/3620(1%)的检测结果不确定,3620 份标本中有 387/3620(11%)为阳性。48 例检测结果不确定的患者中,39 例(81%)符合 CDI 的临床病例定义,其中 7 例(18%)符合严重 CDI 的标准。产毒粪便培养阳性率为 7 例严重 CDI 患者中的 86%(6/7)、32 例非严重 CDI 患者中的 19%(6/32)和 9 例不符合 CDI 临床病例定义的患者中的 44%(4/9)(p=0.002)。较低的 tcdB Ct 和较高的 Ept 与产毒培养阳性的可能性更大(p=0.03)和更严重的症状相关(p=0.06)。不确定的结果与特定的技术人员或仪器模块或艰难梭菌菌株类型无关。

结论

使用 Xpert®艰难梭菌检测的部分标本(1%)有典型的扩增曲线,被解释为阴性。这些结果中至少有三分之一与阳性 CD 培养结果相关。这些不确定结果的机制不是技术相关、设备相关或特定 CD 菌株所致。临床医生应注意,即使是 PCR 检测也有可能漏诊 CDI 病例,这进一步强调了在解释结果时临床背景的重要性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c547/3718660/658294260a37/1471-2334-13-324-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c547/3718660/658294260a37/1471-2334-13-324-1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c547/3718660/658294260a37/1471-2334-13-324-1.jpg

相似文献

1
Indeterminate tcdB using a Clostridium difficile PCR assay: a retrospective cohort study.使用艰难梭菌 PCR 检测法检测不确定 tcdB:一项回顾性队列研究。
BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Jul 16;13:324. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-324.
2
Emergence of Clostridium difficile ribotype 027 in Korea.韩国艰难梭菌核糖型027的出现。
Korean J Lab Med. 2011 Jul;31(3):191-6. doi: 10.3343/kjlm.2011.31.3.191. Epub 2011 Jun 28.
3
Algorithm combining toxin immunoassay and stool culture for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.结合毒素免疫测定和粪便培养诊断艰难梭菌感染的算法
J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Sep;47(9):2952-6. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00609-09. Epub 2009 Jul 22.
4
Evaluation of a new commercial TaqMan PCR assay for direct detection of the clostridium difficile toxin B gene in clinical stool specimens.评估一种新的商业 TaqMan PCR 检测方法,用于直接检测临床粪便标本中的艰难梭菌毒素 B 基因。
J Clin Microbiol. 2009 Dec;47(12):3846-50. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01490-09. Epub 2009 Oct 21.
5
Clostridium difficile infection in an Iranian hospital.伊朗一家医院的艰难梭菌感染
BMC Res Notes. 2012 Mar 21;5:159. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-159.
6
Clinical characteristics of community-onset Clostridioides difficile infections at a tertiary hospital in mainland China: A fourteen-year (2010-2023) retrospective study.中国大陆一家三级医院社区获得性艰难梭菌感染的临床特征:一项十四年(2010-2023)回顾性研究。
Int J Med Microbiol. 2024 Sep;316:151631. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmm.2024.151631. Epub 2024 Jul 14.
7
Clostridium difficile testing in the clinical laboratory by use of multiple testing algorithms.临床实验室中采用多重检测算法检测艰难梭菌。
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Mar;48(3):889-93. doi: 10.1128/JCM.01801-09. Epub 2010 Jan 13.
8
Clostridium difficile ribotype 176 - A predictor for high mortality and risk of nosocomial spread?艰难梭菌核糖体分型176——高死亡率和医院内传播风险的预测指标?
Anaerobe. 2016 Aug;40:35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2016.05.002. Epub 2016 May 4.
9
Evaluation of the diagnostic performance of the xpert Clostridium difficile assay and its comparison with the toxin A/B enzyme-linked fluorescent assay and in-house real-time PCR assay used for the detection of toxigenic C. difficile.评估 xpert 艰难梭菌检测的诊断性能,并将其与毒素 A/B 酶联荧光检测和用于检测产毒艰难梭菌的内部实时 PCR 检测进行比较。
J Clin Lab Anal. 2014 Mar;28(2):124-9. doi: 10.1002/jcla.21655. Epub 2014 Jan 6.
10
Evaluation of tcdB real-time PCR in a three-step diagnostic algorithm for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile.评价 tcdB 实时 PCR 在产毒艰难梭菌三步诊断算法中的应用。
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Jan;48(1):124-30. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00734-09. Epub 2009 Nov 18.

引用本文的文献

1
False Negative Results in Clostridium difficile Testing.艰难梭菌检测中的假阴性结果。
BMC Infect Dis. 2016 Aug 19;16(1):430. doi: 10.1186/s12879-016-1741-6.

本文引用的文献

1
Easily modified factors contribute to delays in diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: a cohort study and intervention.易变因素导致艰难梭菌感染诊断延迟:一项队列研究和干预。
J Clin Microbiol. 2013 Jul;51(7):2365-70. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03142-12. Epub 2013 May 15.
2
Does empirical Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) therapy result in false-negative CDI diagnostic test results?经验性治疗是否会导致艰难梭菌感染(CDI)诊断检测结果呈假阴性?
Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Aug;57(4):494-500. doi: 10.1093/cid/cit286. Epub 2013 May 3.
3
Evaluation of the Xpert Clostridium difficile assay for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.
评估 Xpert 艰难梭菌检测法在艰难梭菌感染诊断中的应用。
Ann Lab Med. 2012 Sep;32(5):355-8. doi: 10.3343/alm.2012.32.5.355. Epub 2012 Aug 13.
4
Comparison of commercial molecular assays for toxigenic Clostridium difficile detection in stools: BD GeneOhm Cdiff, XPert C. difficile and illumigene C. difficile.商用分子检测方法在粪便中产毒艰难梭菌检测的比较:BD GeneOhm Cdiff、Xpert C. difficile 和 illumigene C. difficile。
J Microbiol Methods. 2012 Aug;90(2):83-5. doi: 10.1016/j.mimet.2012.04.017. Epub 2012 Apr 28.
5
Impact of clinical symptoms on interpretation of diagnostic assays for Clostridium difficile infections.临床症状对艰难梭菌感染诊断检测结果解读的影响。
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 Aug;49(8):2887-93. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00891-11. Epub 2011 Jun 22.
6
Modified multiple-locus variable-number tandem-repeat analysis for rapid identification and typing of Clostridium difficile during institutional outbreaks.改良多位点可变数目串联重复分析在医院暴发期间快速鉴定和分型艰难梭菌。
J Clin Microbiol. 2011 May;49(5):1983-6. doi: 10.1128/JCM.02359-10. Epub 2011 Mar 16.
7
Comparison of two commercial molecular tests for the detection of Clostridium difficile in the routine diagnostic laboratory.比较两种商业性分子检测方法在常规诊断实验室检测艰难梭菌的效果。
J Med Microbiol. 2011 Aug;60(Pt 8):1131-1136. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.030163-0. Epub 2011 Mar 3.
8
Impact of strain type on detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile: comparison of molecular diagnostic and enzyme immunoassay approaches.菌株类型对产毒艰难梭菌检测的影响:分子诊断与酶免疫分析方法的比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 2010 Oct;48(10):3719-24. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00427-10. Epub 2010 Aug 11.
9
Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in diarrheal stools by rapid real-time polymerase chain reaction.采用快速实时聚合酶链反应检测腹泻粪便中的产毒艰难梭菌。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010 Jul;67(3):304-7. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.02.019.
10
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).艰难梭菌感染临床实践指南:美国医疗保健流行病学学会(SHEA)和美国传染病学会(IDSA)2010 年更新版。
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010 May;31(5):431-55. doi: 10.1086/651706.