Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Infection Control, St John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, Michigan2Department of Internal Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.
Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor4Veterans Affairs Ann Arbor Healthcare System, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
JAMA. 2015 Jan 27;313(4):398-408. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.17103.
Since 2000, the incidence and severity of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) have increased.
To review current evidence regarding best practices for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in adults (age ≥ 18 years).
Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched using keywords relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in adults. Articles published between January 1978 and October 31, 2014, were selected for inclusion based on targeted keyword searches, manual review of bibliographies, and whether the article was a guideline, systematic review, or meta-analysis published within the past 10 years. Of 4682 articles initially identified, 196 were selected for full review. Of these, the most pertinent 116 articles were included. Clinical trials, large observational studies, and more recently published articles were prioritized in the selection process.
Laboratory testing cannot distinguish between asymptomatic colonization and symptomatic infection with C difficile. Diagnostic approaches are complex due to the availability of multiple testing strategies. Multistep algorithms using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the toxin gene(s) or single-step PCR on liquid stool samples have the best test performance characteristics (for multistep: sensitivity was 0.68-1.00 and specificity was 0.92-1.00; and for single step: sensitivity was 0.86-0.92 and specificity was 0.94-0.97). Vancomycin and metronidazole are first-line therapies for most patients, although treatment failures have been associated with metronidazole in severe or complicated cases of CDI. Recent data demonstrate clinical success rates of 66.3% for metronidazole vs 78.5% for vancomycin for severe CDI. Newer therapies show promising results, including fidaxomicin (similar clinical cure rates to vancomycin, with lower recurrence rates for fidaxomicin, 15.4% vs vancomycin, 25.3%; P = .005) and fecal microbiota transplantation (response rates of 83%-94% for recurrent CDI).
Diagnostic testing for CDI should be performed only in symptomatic patients. Treatment strategies should be based on disease severity, history of prior CDI, and the individual patient's risk of recurrence. Vancomycin is the treatment of choice for severe or complicated CDI, with or without adjunctive therapies. Metronidazole is appropriate for mild disease. Fidaxomicin is a therapeutic option for patients with recurrent CDI or a high risk of recurrence. Fecal microbiota transplantation is associated with symptom resolution of recurrent CDI but its role in primary and severe CDI is not established.
自 2000 年以来,艰难梭菌感染(CDI)的发病率和严重程度有所增加。
综述目前关于成人(年龄≥18 岁)CDI 的诊断和治疗最佳实践的证据。
使用与成人 CDI 的诊断和治疗相关的关键词,在 Ovid MEDLINE 和 Cochrane 数据库中进行检索。根据目标关键词搜索、参考文献的手工审查以及文章是否为过去 10 年内发表的指南、系统评价或荟萃分析,选择 1978 年 1 月至 2014 年 10 月 31 日期间发表的文章进行纳入。最初确定的 4682 篇文章中,有 196 篇被选为全文审查。其中,选择了最相关的 116 篇文章进行综述。在选择过程中,优先考虑临床试验、大型观察性研究和最近发表的文章。
实验室检测不能区分无症状定植和有症状的艰难梭菌感染。由于存在多种检测策略,诊断方法很复杂。多步骤聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测毒素基因或单个步骤检测液体粪便样本的 PCR 具有最佳的检测性能特征(对于多步骤检测:敏感性为 0.68-1.00,特异性为 0.92-1.00;对于单步骤检测:敏感性为 0.86-0.92,特异性为 0.94-0.97)。万古霉素和甲硝唑是大多数患者的一线治疗药物,尽管在严重或复杂的 CDI 中,甲硝唑与治疗失败有关。最近的数据显示,甲硝唑治疗严重 CDI 的临床成功率为 66.3%,而万古霉素为 78.5%。新的治疗方法显示出有希望的结果,包括非达霉素(与万古霉素的临床治愈率相似,非达霉素的复发率较低,为 15.4%,而万古霉素为 25.3%;P=0.005)和粪便微生物群移植(复发性 CDI 的反应率为 83%-94%)。
只有在有症状的患者中才应进行 CDI 的诊断性检测。治疗策略应基于疾病严重程度、既往 CDI 病史以及患者的复发风险。万古霉素是严重或复杂 CDI 的治疗选择,无论是否联合辅助治疗。甲硝唑适用于轻度疾病。非达霉素是复发性 CDI 或复发风险高的患者的治疗选择。粪便微生物群移植与复发性 CDI 的症状缓解相关,但在原发性和严重 CDI 中的作用尚未确定。