Microbiology, PathWest Laboratory Medicine, Princess Margaret Hospital, Perth, Western Australia, Australia,
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2014 Sep;33(9):1555-64. doi: 10.1007/s10096-014-2108-9. Epub 2014 Apr 30.
The increasing incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in paediatric hospitalised populations, combined with the emergence of hypervirulent strains, community-acquired CDI and the need for prompt treatment and infection control, makes the rapid, accurate diagnosis of CDI crucial. We validated commonly used C. difficile diagnostic tests in a paediatric hospital population. From October 2011 to January 2012, 150 consecutive stools were collected from 75 patients at a tertiary paediatric hospital in Perth, Western Australia. Stools were tested using: C. Diff Quik Chek Complete, Illumigene C. difficile, GeneOhm Cdiff, cycloserine cefoxitin fructose agar (CCFA) culture, and cell culture cytotoxin neutralisation assay (CCNA). The reference standard was growth on CCFA or Cdiff Chromagar and PCR on isolates to detect tcdA, tcdB, cdtA, and cdtB. Isolates were PCR ribotyped. The prevalence of CDI was high (43 % of patients). Quik Chek Complete glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) demonstrated a low negative predictive value (NPV) (93 %). Both CCNA and Quik Chek Complete toxin A/B had poor sensitivity (33 % and 29 % respectively). Molecular methods both had 89 % sensitivity. Algorithms using GDH + Illumigene or GeneOhm reduced the sensitivity to 85 % and 83 % respectively. Ribotype UK014/20 predominated. GDH NPV and GeneOhm and Illumigene sensitivities were reduced compared with adult studies. Quik Chek Complete and CCNA cannot reliably detect toxigenic CDI. A GDH first algorithm showed reduced sensitivity. In a high prevalence paediatric population, molecular methods alone are recommended over the use of GDH algorithm or culture and CCNA, as they demonstrate the best test performance characteristics.
艰难梭菌感染(CDI)在儿科住院人群中的发病率不断上升,加上高毒力菌株的出现、社区获得性 CDI 以及需要迅速准确的诊断和感染控制,使得快速准确地诊断 CDI 变得至关重要。我们在儿科医院人群中验证了常用的艰难梭菌诊断检测方法。2011 年 10 月至 2012 年 1 月,从西澳大利亚珀斯的一家三级儿科医院的 75 名患者中采集了 150 份连续粪便。使用以下方法对粪便进行检测:C. Diff Quik Chek Complete、Illumigene C. difficile、GeneOhm Cdiff、环丝氨酸头孢西丁果糖琼脂(CCFA)培养和细胞培养细胞毒素中和试验(CCNA)。参考标准是在 CCFA 或 Cdiff Chromagar 上生长以及对分离株进行 PCR 检测 tcdA、tcdB、cdtA 和 cdtB。对分离株进行 PCR 核糖体分型。CDI 的患病率很高(43%的患者)。Quik Chek Complete 谷氨酸脱氢酶(GDH)的阴性预测值(NPV)较低(93%)。CCNA 和 Quik Chek Complete 毒素 A/B 的敏感性均较差(分别为 33%和 29%)。分子方法的敏感性均为 89%。使用 GDH + Illumigene 或 GeneOhm 的算法敏感性分别降低至 85%和 83%。英国型 UK014/20 占主导地位。与成人研究相比,GDH NPV 和 GeneOhm 和 Illumigene 的敏感性降低。Quik Chek Complete 和 CCNA 不能可靠地检测产毒 CDI。GDH 算法显示敏感性降低。在高患病率的儿科人群中,建议单独使用分子方法,而不是使用 GDH 算法或培养和 CCNA,因为它们具有最佳的测试性能特征。