• 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

相似文献

1
Evaluation of Cycle Threshold, Toxin Concentration, and Clinical Characteristics of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Patients with Discordant Diagnostic Test Results.诊断试验结果不一致的艰难梭菌感染患者的循环阈值、毒素浓度及临床特征评估
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Apr 23;58(5). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01681-19.
2
High Agreement Between an Ultrasensitive Clostridioides difficile Toxin Assay and a C. difficile Laboratory Algorithm Utilizing GDH-and-Toxin Enzyme Immunoassays and Cytotoxin Testing.高敏艰难梭菌毒素检测与应用谷氨酸脱氢酶和毒素酶联免疫吸附试验及细胞毒素检测的艰难梭菌实验室算法的高度一致性。
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Jan 28;58(2). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01629-19.
3
Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins A and B by Use of Automated Single-Molecule Counting Technology.利用自动化单分子计数技术检测艰难梭菌毒素 A 和 B 的超敏性。
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Oct 25;56(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00908-18. Print 2018 Nov.
4
Increased Clinical Specificity with Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins: Reduction of Overdiagnosis Compared to Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests.超敏检测艰难梭菌毒素可提高临床特异性:与核酸扩增检测相比,减少过度诊断。
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Oct 23;57(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00945-19. Print 2019 Nov.
5
Laboratory comparison between cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay and ultrasensitive single molecule counting technology for detection of Clostridioides difficile toxins A and B, PCR, enzyme immunoassays, and multistep algorithms.实验室比较细胞毒性中和测定法与超敏单分子计数技术,用于检测艰难梭菌毒素 A 和 B、PCR、酶免疫测定法和多步骤算法。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Sep;95(1):20-24. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2019.04.002. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
6
Evaluation of a Gastrointestinal Pathogen Panel Immunoassay in Stool Testing of Patients with Suspected () Infection.粪便检测疑似 () 感染患者的胃肠道病原体面板免疫测定评估。
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Sep 24;57(10). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00710-19. Print 2019 Oct.
7
Evaluation of Risk Factors for Clostridium difficile Infection Based on Immunochromatography Testing and Toxigenic Culture Assay.基于免疫胶体金渗滤法检测和产毒培养检测对艰难梭菌感染危险因素的评估。
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Nov 27;56(12). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00555-18. Print 2018 Dec.
8
Prospective Evaluation of the mariPOC Test for Detection of Clostridioides difficile Glutamate Dehydrogenase and Toxins A/B.用于检测艰难梭菌谷氨酸脱氢酶及毒素A/B的mariPOC检测的前瞻性评估
J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Mar 25;58(4). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01872-19.
9
Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins in Stool by Use of Single-Molecule Counting Technology: Comparison with Detection of Free Toxin by Cell Culture Cytotoxicity Neutralization Assay.利用单分子计数技术检测粪便中的艰难梭菌毒素:与细胞培养细胞毒性中和试验检测游离毒素的比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Oct 23;57(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00719-19. Print 2019 Nov.
10
Detection of toxigenic Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile: Usefulness of two commercially available enzyme immunoassays and a PCR assay on stool samples and stool isolates.产毒艰难梭菌的检测:两种市售酶免疫测定法及聚合酶链反应法对粪便样本和粪便分离株的应用价值
Rev Argent Microbiol. 2018 Jan-Mar;50(1):36-44. doi: 10.1016/j.ram.2017.01.002. Epub 2017 Oct 6.

引用本文的文献

1
Clinical significance of toxin EIA positivity in patients with suspected infection: systematic review and meta-analysis.疑似感染患者毒素酶免疫测定阳性的临床意义:系统评价与Meta分析
J Clin Microbiol. 2025 Jan 31;63(1):e0097724. doi: 10.1128/jcm.00977-24. Epub 2024 Dec 12.
2
Comparison of the STANDARD M10 . , Xpert . , and BD MAX Cdiff assays as confirmatory tests in a two-step algorithm for diagnosing infection.将标准M10、Xpert和BD MAX艰难梭菌检测作为两步诊断算法中感染确认试验的比较。
Microbiol Spectr. 2025 Jan 7;13(1):e0166224. doi: 10.1128/spectrum.01662-24. Epub 2024 Nov 29.
3
Development and evaluation of a rapid visual loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for the gene in detection.用于检测 基因的快速目视环介导等温扩增检测法的建立与评价。
PeerJ. 2024 Aug 30;12:e17776. doi: 10.7717/peerj.17776. eCollection 2024.
4
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.
5
A retrospective chart review assessing antibiotic treatment of hospitalized patients with discordant assays in an urban hospitalized setting.一项针对城市住院环境中检测结果不一致的住院患者抗生素治疗情况的回顾性病历审查。
Antimicrob Steward Healthc Epidemiol. 2024 Apr 23;4(1):e57. doi: 10.1017/ash.2024.60. eCollection 2024.
6
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.
7
Simultaneous detection and ribotyping of Clostridioides difficile, and toxin gene detection directly on fecal samples.同时检测粪便样本中的艰难梭菌,并进行核糖体分型和毒素基因检测。
Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2021 Jan 29;10(1):23. doi: 10.1186/s13756-020-00881-9.

本文引用的文献

1
Increased Clinical Specificity with Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins: Reduction of Overdiagnosis Compared to Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests.超敏检测艰难梭菌毒素可提高临床特异性:与核酸扩增检测相比,减少过度诊断。
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Oct 23;57(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00945-19. Print 2019 Nov.
2
Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins in Stool by Use of Single-Molecule Counting Technology: Comparison with Detection of Free Toxin by Cell Culture Cytotoxicity Neutralization Assay.利用单分子计数技术检测粪便中的艰难梭菌毒素:与细胞培养细胞毒性中和试验检测游离毒素的比较。
J Clin Microbiol. 2019 Oct 23;57(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00719-19. Print 2019 Nov.
3
A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) and Algorithms Including NAATs for the Diagnosis of () in Adults.一项关于核酸扩增检测(NAATs)和包括 NAATs 在内的算法在诊断成人()中的实验室医学最佳实践系统评价和荟萃分析。
Clin Microbiol Rev. 2019 May 29;32(3). doi: 10.1128/CMR.00032-18. Print 2019 Jun 19.
4
Laboratory comparison between cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay and ultrasensitive single molecule counting technology for detection of Clostridioides difficile toxins A and B, PCR, enzyme immunoassays, and multistep algorithms.实验室比较细胞毒性中和测定法与超敏单分子计数技术,用于检测艰难梭菌毒素 A 和 B、PCR、酶免疫测定法和多步骤算法。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Sep;95(1):20-24. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2019.04.002. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
5
Toxin Enzyme Immunoassays Detect Clostridioides difficile Infection With Greater Severity and Higher Recurrence Rates.毒素酶免疫测定法检测艰难梭菌感染的严重程度更高,复发率更高。
Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Oct 30;69(10):1667-1674. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciz009.
6
Ultrasensitive Detection of Clostridioides difficile Toxins A and B by Use of Automated Single-Molecule Counting Technology.利用自动化单分子计数技术检测艰难梭菌毒素 A 和 B 的超敏性。
J Clin Microbiol. 2018 Oct 25;56(11). doi: 10.1128/JCM.00908-18. Print 2018 Nov.
7
Evaluation of a best practice alert to reduce unnecessary Clostridium difficile testing following receipt of a laxative.评估一项最佳实践警报,以减少在接受泻药后进行不必要的艰难梭菌检测。
Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018 Sep;92(1):50-55. doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2018.04.009. Epub 2018 Apr 21.
8
Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Hematologic Malignancy Patients With Positive Clostridium difficile Toxin Immunoassay Versus Polymerase Chain Reaction Test Results.艰难梭菌毒素免疫检测阳性与聚合酶链反应检测结果阳性的血液系统恶性肿瘤患者的临床特征和结局。
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2018 Jul;39(7):863-866. doi: 10.1017/ice.2018.83. Epub 2018 Apr 25.
9
Molecular-based diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection is associated with reduced mortality.基于分子的艰难梭菌感染诊断与降低死亡率相关。
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018 Jun;37(6):1137-1142. doi: 10.1007/s10096-018-3228-4. Epub 2018 Apr 7.
10
Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile Infection in Adults and Children: 2017 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA).临床实践指南:成人和儿童艰难梭菌感染:美国传染病学会(IDSA)和美国医疗保健流行病学学会(SHEA)2017 年更新。
Clin Infect Dis. 2018 Mar 19;66(7):987-994. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciy149.

诊断试验结果不一致的艰难梭菌感染患者的循环阈值、毒素浓度及临床特征评估

Evaluation of Cycle Threshold, Toxin Concentration, and Clinical Characteristics of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Patients with Discordant Diagnostic Test Results.

作者信息

Shah Megan D, Balada-Llasat Joan-Miquel, Coe Kelci, Reed Erica, Sandlund Johanna, Pancholi Preeti

机构信息

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.

出版信息

J Clin Microbiol. 2020 Apr 23;58(5). doi: 10.1128/JCM.01681-19.

DOI:10.1128/JCM.01681-19
PMID:32051264
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7180257/
Abstract

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.

摘要

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。