• 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

Xpert艰难梭菌检测法诊断艰难梭菌感染的准确性：一项荟萃分析。

Accuracy of Xpert Clostridium difficile assay for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: A meta analysis.

作者信息

Bai Yuanyuan, Sun Xiaorong, Jin Yan, Wang Yueling, Li Juan

机构信息

Department of Clinical Laboratory, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, PR China.

Department of Pathology, Jinan Women and Children's Health Hospital, Jinan, PR China.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2017 Oct 9;12(10):e0185891. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185891. eCollection 2017.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0185891
PMID:29016644
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5633177/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is an urgent need for rapid and accurate microbiological diagnostic assay for detection of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of the Xpert Clostridium difficile assay (Xpert CD) for the diagnosis of CDI.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies according to predetermined criteria. STATA 13.0 software was used to analyze the tests for sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and area under the summary receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC). QUADAS-2 was used to assess the quality of included studies with RevMan 5.2. Heterogeneity in accuracy measures was tested with Spearman correlation coefficient and Chi-square.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity (95% confidence intervals [CI]) was 0.97 (0.95-0.99) and specificity was 0.95 (0.94-0.96). The AUC was 0.99 (0.97-0.99). Significant heterogeneity was observed when we pooled most of the accuracy measures of selected studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The Xpert CD assay is a useful diagnostic tool with high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing toxigenic CDI, and this method has excellent usability due to its rapidity and simplicity.

摘要

背景

迫切需要快速准确的微生物诊断检测方法来检测艰难梭菌感染（CDI）。我们评估了Xpert艰难梭菌检测法（Xpert CD）对CDI诊断的准确性。

方法

我们根据预定标准检索了PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库以识别研究。使用STATA 13.0软件分析检测的敏感性、特异性、阳性似然比、阴性似然比、诊断比值比以及汇总接受者操作特征曲线下面积（AUC）。使用QUADAS-2和RevMan 5.2评估纳入研究的质量。使用Spearman相关系数和卡方检验准确性测量中的异质性。

结果

共有22项研究纳入荟萃分析。合并敏感性（95%置信区间[CI]）为0.97（0.95 - 0.99），特异性为0.95（0.94 - 0.96）。AUC为0.99（0.97 - 0.99）。当我们汇总所选研究的大多数准确性测量时，观察到显著的异质性。

结论

Xpert CD检测法是一种有用的诊断工具，在诊断产毒型CDI方面具有高敏感性和特异性，并且由于其快速性和简便性，该方法具有出色的实用性。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/09e178e705fc/pone.0185891.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/5469d53abc54/pone.0185891.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/0d69bb129fa1/pone.0185891.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/7328411df6dc/pone.0185891.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/6b056bef0a00/pone.0185891.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/09e178e705fc/pone.0185891.g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/5469d53abc54/pone.0185891.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/0d69bb129fa1/pone.0185891.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/7328411df6dc/pone.0185891.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/6b056bef0a00/pone.0185891.g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/2b4c/5633177/09e178e705fc/pone.0185891.g005.jpg

相似文献

1
Accuracy of Xpert Clostridium difficile assay for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: A meta analysis.Xpert艰难梭菌检测法诊断艰难梭菌感染的准确性：一项荟萃分析。
PLoS One. 2017 Oct 9;12(10):e0185891. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0185891. eCollection 2017.
2
Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert C. difficile diagnostic assay: an update meta-analysis.评价赛沛 Xpert C. difficile 检测试剂盒：一项更新的荟萃分析。
Braz J Microbiol. 2021 Dec;52(4):1937-1949. doi: 10.1007/s42770-021-00563-7. Epub 2021 Aug 29.
3
Diagnostic accuracy of real-time polymerase chain reaction in detection of Clostridium difficile in the stool samples of patients with suspected Clostridium difficile Infection: a meta-analysis.实时聚合酶链反应检测疑似艰难梭菌感染患者粪便样本中艰难梭菌的诊断准确性：一项荟萃分析。
Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Oct;53(7):e81-90. doi: 10.1093/cid/cir505.
4
The Clinical and Laboratory Impact of Upgrading Clostridioides (formerly Clostridium) difficile Infection Testing from Routine to Molecular Based-Algorithm: an Observational Case-Study from the Eastern Province, Saudi Arabia.将艰难梭菌感染检测从常规方法升级为基于分子的算法的临床和实验室影响：来自沙特阿拉伯东部省的一项观察性病例研究。 （注：Clostridioides difficile是艰难梭菌的新属名，原文中括号内的formerly Clostridium表示以前的梭菌属）
Clin Lab. 2019 Aug 1;65(8). doi: 10.7754/Clin.Lab.2019.181252.
5
Evaluation of the performance of C. DIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE and its usefulness in a hospital setting with a high prevalence of Clostridium difficile infection.艰难梭菌感染高流行率医院环境中C. DIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE检测性能及其效用评估
J Investig Med. 2017 Jan;65(1):88-92. doi: 10.1136/jim-2016-000231. Epub 2016 Sep 13.
6
Accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review.环介导等温扩增技术诊断艰难梭菌感染的准确性：一项系统评价
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 May;82(1):4-10. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2015.02.007. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
7
Diagnostic test accuracy of glutamate dehydrogenase for Clostridium difficile: Systematic review and meta-analysis.谷氨酸脱氢酶检测艰难梭菌的诊断准确性：系统评价和荟萃分析。
Sci Rep. 2016 Jul 15;6:29754. doi: 10.1038/srep29754.
8
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.
9
Diagnostic accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification in detection of Clostridium difficile in stool samples: a meta-analysis.环介导等温扩增技术检测粪便样本中艰难梭菌的诊断准确性：一项荟萃分析
Arch Med Sci. 2015 Oct 12;11(5):927-36. doi: 10.5114/aoms.2015.54846.
10
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.

引用本文的文献

1
Comparative evaluation of the STANDARD M10 and Xpert . assays for detection of toxigenic in stool specimens.比较评估 STANDARD M10 和 Xpert 检测粪便标本中产毒 的检测效果。
J Clin Microbiol. 2024 Jul 16;62(7):e0052424. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00524-24. Epub 2024 Jun 27.
2
Overview of current detection methods and microRNA potential in infection screening. 感染筛查中当前检测方法和 microRNA 潜力概述。
World J Gastroenterol. 2023 Jun 14;29(22):3385-3399. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i22.3385.
3
Prevalence and Seasonality of Clostridiodes difficile over 12 Years at a Tertiary Hospital in Brazil.

本文引用的文献

1
Performance of the artus C. difficile QS-RGQ Kit for the detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile.用于检测产毒艰难梭菌的阿图斯艰难梭菌QS-RGQ检测试剂盒的性能
Clin Biochem. 2017 Jan;50(1-2):84-87. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2016.08.013. Epub 2016 Aug 23.
2
Comparison of Diagnostic Algorithms for Detecting Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in Routine Practice at a Tertiary Referral Hospital in Korea.韩国一家三级转诊医院日常实践中检测产毒艰难梭菌的诊断算法比较
PLoS One. 2016 Aug 17;11(8):e0161139. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0161139. eCollection 2016.
3
GenoType MTBDRplus Assay for Rapid Detection of Multidrug Resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis: A Meta-Analysis.
巴西一家三级医院 12 年来艰难梭菌的流行情况和季节性。
Curr Microbiol. 2022 Oct 11;79(12):354. doi: 10.1007/s00284-022-03062-6.
4
Toxin B PCR Cycle Threshold as a Predictor of Toxin Testing in Stool Specimens from Hospitalized Adults.毒素B聚合酶链式反应循环阈值作为住院成人粪便标本毒素检测的预测指标
Antibiotics (Basel). 2022 Apr 26;11(5):576. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics11050576.
5
Prevalence of Infection in the Hematopoietic Transplantation Setting: Update of Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.造血移植环境中的感染发生率：系统评价和荟萃分析更新。
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2022 Feb 21;12:801475. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2022.801475. eCollection 2022.
6
Evaluation of the Cepheid Xpert C. difficile diagnostic assay: an update meta-analysis.评价赛沛 Xpert C. difficile 检测试剂盒：一项更新的荟萃分析。
Braz J Microbiol. 2021 Dec;52(4):1937-1949. doi: 10.1007/s42770-021-00563-7. Epub 2021 Aug 29.
7
Performance of commercial PCR assays to detect toxigenic Clostridioides difficile in the feces of puppies.商业 PCR 检测试剂盒在幼犬粪便中检测产毒艰难梭菌的性能。
Vet Med Sci. 2021 Sep;7(5):1536-1541. doi: 10.1002/vms3.567. Epub 2021 Jul 3.
用于快速检测结核分枝杆菌多重耐药性的GenoType MTBDRplus检测法：一项荟萃分析
PLoS One. 2016 Mar 2;11(3):e0150321. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150321. eCollection 2016.
4
A comparison of diagnostic methods for identification of local strains in a South African centre.南非某中心用于鉴定本地菌株的诊断方法比较。
J Med Microbiol. 2016 Apr;65(4):320-327. doi: 10.1099/jmm.0.000231. Epub 2016 Feb 9.
5
Evaluation of Xpert C. difficile, BD MAX Cdiff, IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000, and Illumigene C. difficile Assays for Direct Detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in Stool Specimens.对Xpert艰难梭菌检测试剂盒、BD MAX艰难梭菌检测系统、用于雅培m2000的IMDx艰难梭菌检测试剂盒以及Illumigene艰难梭菌检测试剂盒在粪便标本中直接检测产毒艰难梭菌的评估。
Ann Lab Med. 2016 Mar;36(2):131-7. doi: 10.3343/alm.2016.36.2.131.
6
Comparison of Multilocus Sequence Typing and the Xpert C. difficile/Epi Assay for Identification of Clostridium difficile 027/NAP1/BI.多位点序列分型与Xpert艰难梭菌/疫情检测法用于鉴定艰难梭菌027/NAP1/BI的比较
J Clin Microbiol. 2016 Mar;54(3):775-8. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03075-15. Epub 2015 Dec 23.
7
Evaluation of 3 automated real-time PCR (Xpert C. difficile assay, BD MAX Cdiff, and IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000 assay) for detecting Clostridium difficile toxin gene compared to toxigenic culture in stool specimens.与粪便标本中产毒培养法相比，评估3种自动化实时荧光定量PCR方法（Xpert艰难梭菌检测法、BD MAX艰难梭菌检测法以及用于雅培m2000检测系统的IMDx艰难梭菌检测法）检测艰难梭菌毒素基因的效果。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 Sep;83(1):7-10. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2015.05.005. Epub 2015 May 14.
8
Evaluation of the Qiagen artus C. difficile QS-RGQ Kit for Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxins A and B in Clinical Stool Specimens.用于检测临床粪便标本中艰难梭菌毒素A和毒素B的Qiagen artus艰难梭菌QS-RGQ检测试剂盒的评估
J Clin Microbiol. 2015 Jun;53(6):1942-4. doi: 10.1128/JCM.00613-15. Epub 2015 Mar 25.
9
Accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review.环介导等温扩增技术诊断艰难梭菌感染的准确性：一项系统评价
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 May;82(1):4-10. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2015.02.007. Epub 2015 Feb 23.
10
Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile: real-time PCR detection of toxin genes in faecal samples is more sensitive compared to toxigenic culture.艰难梭菌的诊断：与产毒培养相比，粪便样本中毒素基因的实时PCR检测更为灵敏。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015 Apr;34(4):727-36. doi: 10.1007/s10096-014-2284-7. Epub 2014 Nov 25.