Hirvonen J J, Kaukoranta S-S
Department of Clinical Microbiology, Vaasa Central Hospital, Hietalahdenkatu 2-4 B2, 65130, Vaasa, Finland,
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 May;34(5):1005-9. doi: 10.1007/s10096-015-2320-2. Epub 2015 Jan 24.
In this study, the usability and performance of GenomEra™ C. difficile and BD Max™ Cdiff nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) for the detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile were investigated in comparison with toxigenic culture and C. difficile toxin A- and toxin B-detecting immunochromatographic antigen (IA) test, the Tox A/B QuikChek®. In total, 302 faecal specimens were collected, 113 of which were in parallel to conventional sample containers and FecalSwab liquid-based microbiology (LBM) tubes. Seventy-nine specimens were considered true-positives for toxigenic C. difficile. The sensitivity and specificity were 97.5 % and 99.6 % and 93.7 % and 98.7 % for the GenomEra and BD Max assays respectively. Toxigenic culture and Tox A/B QuikChek had sensitivity and specificity of 91.1 % and 100 % and 34.2 % and 100 % respectively. Hands-on time for analysing 1 to 24 specimens using NAATs was 1 to 15 min. The rate of PCR inhibition was 0 % for both NAATs with faeces in LBM tubes, while with faeces in conventional sample containers the respective inhibition rates were 5.3 % and 4.4 % for the GenomEra and the BD Max assays. The NAATs demonstrated an excellent analytical performance, reducing significantly the overall workload of laboratory personnel compared with culture and IA test.
在本研究中,对GenomEra™艰难梭菌核酸扩增检测(NAAT)和BD Max™艰难梭菌核酸扩增检测用于检测产毒艰难梭菌的可用性和性能进行了研究,并与产毒培养法以及艰难梭菌毒素A和毒素B检测免疫层析抗原(IA)检测(即Tox A/B QuikChek®)进行了比较。总共收集了302份粪便标本,其中113份与传统样本容器和FecalSwab液体基微生物学(LBM)管平行。79份标本被认为是产毒艰难梭菌的真阳性。GenomEra和BD Max检测的灵敏度和特异性分别为97.5%和99.%; 93.7%和98.7%。产毒培养法和Tox A/B QuikChek的灵敏度和特异性分别为91.1%和100%; 34.2%和100%。使用NAAT分析1至24份标本的实际操作时间为1至15分钟。对于LBM管中的粪便,两种NAAT的PCR抑制率均为0%,而对于传统样本容器中的粪便,GenomEra和BD Max检测的相应抑制率分别为5.3%和4.4%。NAAT显示出优异的分析性能,与培养法和IA检测相比,显著减少了实验室人员的总体工作量。