Suppr超能文献

在高选择性显色培养基上,将艰难梭菌谷氨酸脱氢酶及毒素A+B的酶免疫测定法和快速诊断测试与产毒培养法进行比较。

Comparison of enzyme immunoassays and rapid diagnostic tests for clostridium difficile glutamate dehydrogenase and toxin a + B to toxinogenic culture on a highly selective chromogenic medium.

作者信息

Olling A, Leidinger H, Hoffmann R

机构信息

R-Biopharm, An der neuen Bergstraße 17, 64297, Darmstadt, Germany.

Institut für Labormedizin und Mikrobiologie, Klinikum Augsburg, Stenglinstraße 2, 86156, Augsburg, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016 Oct;35(10):1655-9. doi: 10.1007/s10096-016-2706-9. Epub 2016 Jun 21.

Abstract

To compare Clostridium. (C.) difficile toxin A/B and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) enzyme immunoassays or rapid diagnostic tests to toxinogenic culture on recently described highly selective agar plates. Five hundred consecutive samples sent in for C. difficile diagnostics were tested by toxin A/B enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and rapid diagnostic test (RDT), GDH EIA and RDT, and culture on chromID C. difficile plates for 48 hrs, with toxin testing from culture if the toxin EIA from feces was negative. Samples with discordant results from EIA and RDT were submitted to C. difficile-specific 16S rRNA gene and tcdB PCR. Ninety-two, 88, 31, and 37 samples were positive by GDH EIA, GDH RDT, toxin A/B EIA, and toxin A/B RDT respectively. Seventy-four samples were positive by culture, 54 culture-positive samples were subjected to repeat toxin testing, with an additional 29 samples positive. Thus, there were 60 C. difficile toxin A/B positive samples in total (12 %). Single-step screening with GDH EIA, GDH RDT, toxin A/B EIA, and toxin A/B RDT would have missed seven (12 %), 11 (18 %), 29 (48 %) or 27 (45 %) of all positive samples respectively. Single-step screening with GDH or toxin A/B tests from feces misses a significant proportion of patients compared to toxinogenic culture, putting these patients at risk from undiagnosed C. difficile infection. More data are needed to establish the clinical significance of a positive toxinogenic culture result in the absence of detectable toxin A/B in feces.

摘要

比较艰难梭菌毒素A/B和谷氨酸脱氢酶(GDH)酶免疫测定法或快速诊断测试与在最近描述的高选择性琼脂平板上进行的产毒培养。对连续送来进行艰难梭菌诊断的500份样本,采用毒素A/B酶免疫测定法(EIA)、快速诊断测试(RDT)、GDH EIA和RDT进行检测,并在chromID艰难梭菌平板上培养48小时,如果粪便毒素EIA检测结果为阴性,则对培养物进行毒素检测。对EIA和RDT结果不一致的样本进行艰难梭菌特异性16S rRNA基因和tcdB聚合酶链反应(PCR)检测。分别有92份、88份、31份和37份样本通过GDH EIA、GDH RDT、毒素A/B EIA和毒素A/B RDT检测呈阳性。74份样本培养呈阳性,对54份培养阳性样本进行重复毒素检测,另外有29份样本呈阳性。因此,艰难梭菌毒素A/B阳性样本共有60份(12%)。使用GDH EIA、GDH RDT、毒素A/B EIA和毒素A/B RDT进行单步筛查分别会遗漏所有阳性样本的7份(12%)、11份(18%)、29份(48%)或27份(45%)。与产毒培养相比,使用粪便中的GDH或毒素A/B检测进行单步筛查会遗漏相当一部分患者,使这些患者面临艰难梭菌感染未被诊断的风险。需要更多数据来确定在粪便中未检测到毒素A/B的情况下产毒培养阳性结果的临床意义。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验