Shah Megan D, Balada-Llasat Joan-Miquel, Coe Kelci, Reed Erica, Sandlund Johanna, Pancholi Preeti
Department of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Department of Pathology, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Apr 23;58(5). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01681-19.
infection (CDI) is one of the most common health care-associated infections that can cause significant morbidity and mortality. CDI diagnosis involves laboratory testing in conjunction with clinical assessment. The objective of this study was to assess the performance of various tests and to compare clinical characteristics, Xpert /Epi (PCR) cycle threshold ( ), and Singulex Clarity C. diff toxins A/B (Clarity) concentrations between groups with discordant test results. Unformed stool specimens from 200 hospitalized adults (100 PCR positive and 100 negative) were tested by cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA), C. diff Quik Chek Complete (Quik Chek), Premier Toxins A and B, and Clarity. Clinical data, including CDI severity and CDI risk factors, were compared between discordant test results. Compared to CCNA, PCR had the highest sensitivity at 100% and Quik Chek had the highest specificity at 100%. Among clinical and laboratory data studied, prevalences of leukocytosis, prior antibiotic use, and hospitalizations were consistently higher across all subgroups in comparisons of toxin-positive to toxin-negative patients. Among PCR-positive samples, the median was lower in toxin-positive samples than in toxin-negative samples; however, ranges overlapped. Among Clarity-positive samples, the quantitative toxin concentration was significantly higher in toxin-positive samples than in toxin-negative samples as determined by CCNA and Quik Chek Toxin A and B. Laboratory tests for CDI vary in sensitivity and specificity. The quantitative toxin concentration may offer value in guiding CDI diagnosis and treatment. The presence of leukocytosis, prior antibiotic use, and previous hospitalizations may assist with CDI diagnosis, while other clinical parameters may not be consistently reliable.
艰难梭菌感染(CDI)是最常见的医疗保健相关感染之一,可导致严重的发病和死亡。CDI诊断涉及实验室检测与临床评估相结合。本研究的目的是评估各种检测的性能,并比较检测结果不一致的组之间的临床特征、Xpert /Epi(PCR)循环阈值( )以及Singulex Clarity C. diff毒素A/B(Clarity)浓度。对200名住院成人(100名PCR阳性和100名阴性)的不成形粪便标本进行细胞毒性中和试验(CCNA)、艰难梭菌快速检测全套(Quik Chek)、Premier毒素A和B以及Clarity检测。比较检测结果不一致时的临床数据,包括CDI严重程度和CDI风险因素。与CCNA相比,PCR的灵敏度最高,为100%,Quik Chek的特异性最高,为100%。在研究的临床和实验室数据中,在毒素阳性与毒素阴性患者的比较中,所有亚组中白细胞增多、既往抗生素使用和住院的患病率始终较高。在PCR阳性样本中,毒素阳性样本的中位数 低于毒素阴性样本;然而, 范围有重叠。在Clarity阳性样本中,根据CCNA和Quik Chek毒素A和B测定,毒素阳性样本中的定量毒素浓度明显高于毒素阴性样本。CDI的实验室检测在灵敏度和特异性方面存在差异。定量毒素浓度可能对指导CDI诊断和治疗有价值。白细胞增多、既往抗生素使用和既往住院可能有助于CDI诊断,而其他临床参数可能并非始终可靠。