An evaluation of repeat stool testing for Clostridium difficile infection by polymerase chain reaction

Diagnostic Guidance for C. difficile Infections

Diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) can be challenging. First of all, there has been debate on which of the two reference assays, cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) or toxigenic culture (TC), should be considered the gold standard for CDI detection. Although the CCNA suffers most from suboptimal storage conditions and subsequent toxin degradation, TC is reported to falsely increase CDI detection rates as it cannot differentiate CDI patients from patients asymptomatically colonised by toxigenic C. difficile. Several rapid assays are available for CDI detection and fall into three broad categories: (1) enzyme immunoassays for glutamate dehydrogenase, (2) enzyme immunoassays or single-molecule array assays for toxins A/B and (3) nucleic acid amplification tests detecting toxin genes. All three categories have their own limitations, being suboptimal specificity and/or sensitivity or the inability to discern colonised patients from CDI patients. In light of these limitations, multi-step algorithmic testing has been advocated by international guidelines (IDSA/SHEA and ESCMID) in order to optimize diagnostic accuracy. As a result, a survey performed in 2018-2019 in Europe revealed that most of all hospital sites reported using more than one test to diagnose CDI. CDI incidence rates are also influenced by sample selection criteria, as several studies have shown that if not all unformed stool samples are tested for CDI, many cases may be missed due to an absence of clinical suspicion. Since methods for diagnosing CDI remain imperfect, there has been a growing interest in alternative testing strategies like faecal microbiota biomarkers, immune modulating interleukins, cytokines and imaging methods. At the moment, these alternative methods might play an adjunctive role, but they are not suitable to replace conventional CDI testing strategies.

Prescriber Behavior in Clostridioides difficile Testing: A 3-Hospital Diagnostic Stewardship Intervention

Computerized clinical decision support (CCDS) significantly reduced Clostridioides difficile testing at 3 hospitals; from 12.6 to 9.5, from 10.1 to 6.4, and from 14.0 to 9.6 average weekly tests per 1000 inpatient days. There were no related adverse events. Senior providers were more likely than interns or residents to follow CCDS.

South African Society of Clinical Microbiology Clostridioides difficile infection diagnosis, management and infection prevention and control guideline

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a problem in both developed and developing countries and is a common hospital-acquired infection. This guideline provides evidence-based practical recommendations for South Africa and other developing countries. The scope of the guideline includes CDI diagnostic approaches; adult, paediatric and special populations treatment options; and surveillance and infection prevention and control recommendations.

Clostridioides difficile: diagnosis and treatments

Clostridioides difficile (formerly Clostridium) is a major cause of healthcare associated diarrhea, and is increasingly present in the community. Historically, C difficile infection was considered easy to diagnose and treat. Over the past two decades, however, diagnostic techniques have changed in line with a greater understanding of the physiopathology of C difficile infection and the use of new therapeutic molecules. The evolution of diagnosis showed there was an important under- and misdiagnosis of C difficile infection, emphasizing the importance of algorithms recommended by European and North American infectious diseases societies to obtain a reliable diagnosis. Previously, metronidazole was considered the reference drug to treat C difficile infection, but more recently vancomycin and other newer drugs are shown to have higher cure rates. Recurrence of infection represents a key parameter in the evaluation of new drugs, and the challenge is to target the right population with the adapted therapeutic molecule. In multiple recurrences, fecal microbiota transplantation is recommended. New approaches, including antibodies, vaccines, and new molecules are already available or in the pipeline, but more data are needed to support the inclusion of these in practice guidelines. This review aims to provide a baseline for clinicians to understand and stratify their choice in the diagnosis and treatment of C difficile infection based on the most recent data available.

A Laboratory Medicine Best Practices Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests (NAATs) and Algorithms Including NAATs for the Diagnosis of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile in Adults

The evidence base for the optimal laboratory diagnosis of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile in adults is currently unresolved due to the uncertain performance characteristics and various combinations of tests. This systematic review evaluates the diagnostic accuracy of laboratory testing algorithms that include nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) to detect the presence of C. difficile The systematic review and meta-analysis included eligible studies (those that had PICO [population, intervention, comparison, outcome] elements) that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of NAAT alone or following glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) or GDH EIAs plus C. difficile toxin EIAs (toxin). The diagnostic yield of NAAT for repeat testing after an initial negative result was also assessed. Two hundred thirty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Seventy-two of these studies had sufficient data for meta-analysis. The strength of evidence ranged from high to insufficient. The uses of NAAT only, GDH-positive EIA followed by NAAT, and GDH-positive/toxin-negative EIA followed by NAAT are all recommended as American Society for Microbiology (ASM) best practices for the detection of the C. difficile toxin gene or organism. Meta-analysis of published evidence supports the use of testing algorithms that use NAAT alone or in combination with GDH or GDH plus toxin EIA to detect the presence of C. difficile in adults. There is insufficient evidence to recommend against repeat testing of the sample using NAAT after an initial negative result due to a lack of evidence of harm (i.e., financial, length of stay, or delay of treatment) as specified by the Laboratory Medicine Best Practices (LMBP) systematic review method in making such an assessment. Findings from this systematic review provide clarity to diagnostic testing strategies and highlight gaps, such as low numbers of GDH/toxin/PCR studies, in existing evidence on diagnostic performance, which can be used to guide future clinical research studies.

Diagnostic Guidance for C. difficile Infections

Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) can be challenging. First of all, there has been debate on which of the two reference assays, cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) or toxigenic culture (TC) should be considered the gold standard for CDI detection. Although the CCNA suffers most from suboptimal storage conditions and subsequent toxin degradation, TC is reported to falsely increase CDI detection rates as it cannot differentiate CDI patients from patients asymptomatically colonised by toxigenic C. difficile. Several rapid assays are available for CDI detection and fall into three broad categories: (1) enzyme immunoassays for glutamate dehydrogenase, (2) enzyme immunoassays for toxins A/B and (3) nucleic acid amplification tests detecting toxin genes. All three categories have their own limitations, being suboptimal specificity and/or sensitivity or the inability to discern colonised patients from CDI patients. In light of these limitations, multi-step algorithmic testing has now been advocated by international guidelines in order to optimize diagnostic accuracy. Despite these recommendations, testing methods between hospitals vary widely, which impacts CDI incidence rates. CDI incidence rates are also influenced by sample selection criteria, as several studies have shown that if not all unformed stool samples are tested for CDI, many cases may be missed due to an absence of clinical suspicion. Since methods for diagnosing CDI remain imperfect, there has been a growing interest in alternative testing strategies like faecal biomarkers, immune modulating interleukins, cytokines and imaging methods. At the moment, these alternative methods might play an adjunctive role, but they are not suitable to replace conventional CDI testing strategies.

Clostridium difficile infection: Updates in management

Clostridium difficile was first identified in 1978 as a diarrhea-causing bacterium in humans. In the last three decades, C. difficile infection (CDI) has reached an epidemic state, both in health care and community settings worldwide. There has been substantial progress in the field of CDI, including identification of novel risk factors, presence of CDI in individuals not considered at risk previously, and treatment options including new drugs, monoclonal antibodies, and fecal microbiota transplantation. This review discusses epidemiology, novel and traditional risk factors, and updates in management for CDI.

Novel portable platform for molecular detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in faeces: a diagnostic accuracy study

BACKGROUND

A novel portable platform for nucleic acid amplification enables rapid detection of diarrhoea causing toxigenic Clostridium difficile directly from faeces, even in resource-limited settings. We evaluated the accuracy and precision of the new commercial molecular test system.

METHODS

One thousand one hundred and sixty faecal samples from patients suspected of having Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) were analysed using the Orion GenRead C. difficile test system (Orion Diagnostica Oy, Espoo, Finland) and comparative methods in three teaching hospital laboratories in Finland and France. The precision of the Orion GenRead C. difficile test system was evaluated in a reproducibility study with a set of blind-coded samples. The test system is based on a new isothermal amplification technology (Strand Invasion Based Amplification, SIBA®) and detection of the tcdB gene of C. difficile. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and the overall agreement according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute recommendations.

FINDINGS

The overall agreement of the Orion GenRead C. difficile test when compared to the comparative methods in routine use in the participating laboratories was between 96.7% and 98.8%. In the reproducibility study; the total percent agreement between three laboratories was 99.8%.

INTERPRETATION

The identification of toxigenic C. difficile from faeces with the light-weight portable Orion GenRead test system was highly sensitive and specific, and the results were reproducible in the participating laboratories. This platform could enable fast and accurate molecular pathogen detection even in resource-limited or point-of-care settings.

[Diagnostic workup and therapy of infectious diarrhea. Current standards]

Infectious diarrhea is very common; its severity ranges from uncomplicated, self-limiting courses to potentially life-threatening disease. A rapid diagnostic workup providing detailed information on the suspected pathogen should be performed only in patients at risk, analyzing one single stool sample for Salmonella, Shigella, Campylobacter, and Norovirus. In the presence of risk factors, such as a history of antibiotic exposure within the last 3 months, testing for Clostridium difficile should be performed. Immunocompetent patients do not require specific antibiotic therapy. Exceptions exist in patients with severe comorbidities, immunodeficiency, fever/SIRS, and in patients with Shigella or C. difficile infection. Empirical antibiotic treatment should be considered in patients with fever and/or bloody diarrhea and in patients at risk. In patients with traveler's diarrhea, microbiological diagnosis is required only in patients with fever, bloody diarrhea, prolonged course of disease (more than 5 days), severe clinical course with hypotension or dehydration, and during outbreaks. In these patients one single fecal sample should be collected for stool cultures of Campylobacter, Shigella, and Salmonella, as well as microscopic examination for amoebiasis and Giardiasis. The main therapeutic measure for infectious diarrhea is sufficient oral rehydration. As in community-acquired diarrhea, azithromycin or ciprofloxacin are recommended-taking into account local antimicrobial resistance in the country of travel and possible side effects.

Overdiagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection in the Molecular Test Era

IMPORTANCE

Clostridium difficile is a major cause of health care-associated infection, but disagreement between diagnostic tests is an ongoing barrier to clinical decision making and public health reporting. Molecular tests are increasingly used to diagnose C difficile infection (CDI), but many molecular test-positive patients lack toxins that historically defined disease, making it unclear if they need treatment.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the natural history and need for treatment of patients who are toxin immunoassay negative and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive (Tox-/PCR+) for CDI.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Prospective observational cohort study at a single academic medical center among 1416 hospitalized adults tested for C difficile toxins 72 hours or longer after admission between December 1, 2010, and October 20, 2012. The analysis was conducted in stages with revisions from April 27, 2013, to January 13, 2015.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Patients undergoing C difficile testing were grouped by US Food and Drug Administration-approved toxin and PCR tests as Tox+/PCR+, Tox-/PCR+, or Tox-/PCR-. Toxin results were reported clinically. Polymerase chain reaction results were not reported. The main study outcomes were duration of diarrhea during up to 14 days of treatment, rate of CDI-related complications (ie, colectomy, megacolon, or intensive care unit care) and CDI-related death within 30 days.

RESULTS

Twenty-one percent (293 of 1416) of hospitalized adults tested for C difficile were positive by PCR, but 44.7% (131 of 293) had toxins detected by the clinical toxin test. At baseline, Tox-/PCR+ patients had lower C difficile bacterial load and less antibiotic exposure, fecal inflammation, and diarrhea than Tox+/PCR+ patients (P < .001 for all). The median duration of diarrhea was shorter in Tox-/PCR+ patients (2 days; interquartile range, 1-4 days) than in Tox+/PCR+ patients (3 days; interquartile range, 1-6 days) (P = .003) and was similar to that in Tox-/PCR- patients (2 days; interquartile range, 1-3 days), despite minimal empirical treatment of Tox-/PCR+ patients. No CDI-related complications occurred in Tox-/PCR+ patients vs 10 complications in Tox+/PCR+ patients (0% vs 7.6%, P < .001). One Tox-/PCR+ patient had recurrent CDI as a contributing factor to death within 30 days vs 11 CDI-related deaths in Tox+/PCR+ patients (0.6% vs 8.4%, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Among hospitalized adults with suspected CDI, virtually all CDI-related complications and deaths occurred in patients with positive toxin immunoassay test results. Patients with a positive molecular test result and a negative toxin immunoassay test result had outcomes that were comparable to patients without C difficile by either method. Exclusive reliance on molecular tests for CDI diagnosis without tests for toxins or host response is likely to result in overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and increased health care costs.

Practical Guidance for Clinical Microbiology Laboratories: Diagnosis of Bacterial Gastroenteritis

Bacterial gastroenteritis is a disease that is pervasive in both the developing and developed worlds. While for the most part bacterial gastroenteritis is self-limiting, identification of an etiological agent by bacterial stool culture is required for the management of patients with severe or prolonged diarrhea, symptoms consistent with invasive disease, or a history that may predict a complicated course of disease. Importantly, characterization of bacterial enteropathogens from stool cultures in clinical laboratories is one of the primary means by which public health officials identify and track outbreaks of bacterial gastroenteritis. This article provides guidance for clinical microbiology laboratories that perform stool cultures. The general characteristics, epidemiology, and clinical manifestations of key bacterial enteropathogens are summarized. Information regarding optimal specimen collection, transport, and processing and current diagnostic tests and testing algorithms is provided. This article is an update of Cumitech 12A (P. H. Gilligan, J. M. Janda, M. A. Karmali, and J. M. Miller, Cumitech 12A, Laboratory diagnosis of bacterial diarrhea, 1992).

Characteristics and Antibiotic Use Associated With Short-Term Risk of Clostridium difficile Infection Among Hospitalized Patients

OBJECTIVES

Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) has been shown to have an excellent sensitivity and specificity for the detection of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). Little is known about risk factors for CDI within 14 days of an initial negative test. We sought to determine the characteristics among hospitalized patients associated with risk of short-term acquisition of CDI.

METHODS

A case-control study was conducted. Cases were patients who converted from PCR negative to positive within 14 days. Each case was matched with three controls. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the association between patient characteristics and CDI.

RESULTS

Of the 30 patients in our study who had a positive PCR within 14 days of a first negative PCR (cases), 15 (50%) occurred within 7 days of the initial test. Cases had a higher proportion of intravenous vancomycin use in the previous 8 weeks (odds ratio [OR], 3.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.34-8.49) and were less likely to have recent antiviral agent use (OR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.11-0.83) compared with controls.

CONCLUSIONS

In hospitalized patients, treatment with intravenous vancomycin within the prior 8 weeks of a first negative PCR test for C difficile is a risk factor for short-term risk for hospital-acquired CDI. Repeat testing guidelines for C difficile PCR should take into consideration patients who may be at high risk for short-term acquisition of CDI.

Identification of Recurrent Clostridium difficile Infection Using Administrative Codes: Accuracy and Implications for Surveillance

OBJECTIVE

To develop an algorithm using administrative codes, laboratory data, and medication data to identify recurrent Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) and to examine the sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and performance of this algorithm.

METHODS

We identified all patients with 2 or more International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for CDI (008.45) from January 1 through December 31, 2013. Information on number of diagnosis codes, stool toxin assays (enzyme immunoassay or polymerase chain reaction), and unique prescriptions for metronidazole and vancomycin was identified. Logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of recurrent CDI and a predictive model was developed.

RESULTS

A total of 591 patients with at least 2 ICD-9 codes for CDI were included (median age, 66 years). The derivation cohort consisted of 157 patients among whom 43 (27%) had recurrent CDI. Presence of 3 or more ICD-9 codes for CDI (odds ratio, 2.49), 2 or more stool tests (odds ratio, 2.88), and 2 or more prescriptions for vancomycin (odds ratio, 5.87) were independently associated with confirmed recurrent CDI. A classifier incorporating 2 or more prescriptions for vancomycin and either 2 or more stool tests or 3 or more ICD-9-CM codes had a positive predictive value of 41% and negative predictive value of 90%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for this combined classifier was modest (0.69).

CONCLUSION

Identification of recurrent episodes of CDI in administrative data poses challenges. Accurate assessment of burden requires individual case review to confirm diagnosis.

Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2015;36(8):893–898

Optimizing the Laboratory Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection

The best laboratory diagnostic approach to detect Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is the subject of ongoing debate. In the United States, nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) have become the most widely used tests for making this diagnosis. Detection of toxin in stool may be a better predictor of CDI disease and severity. Laboratories that have switched from toxin-based to NAAT-based methods have significantly higher CDI detection rates. The important issue is whether all NAAT-positive patients have CDI or at least some of those patients are excretors of the organism and do not have clinical disease.

Concomitant pseudomembranous colitis in colonic resection for acute diverticulitis

Diverticulitis and Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) are common conditions in the surgical population. However, they are usually 2 distinct clinical entities. Here, we report the case of acute diverticulitis with concomitant pseudomembranous colitis, presumably due to CDI. The clinical course as well as gross and microscopic pathology findings are discussed. A literature search revealed a single previous report of these findings concomitant in a surgical specimen. A brief discussion of the pathophysiology of CDI and acute diverticulitis is included.

Clinical predictors of recurrent Clostridium difficile infection in out-patients

BACKGROUND

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) recurs in 20-30% of patients.

AIM

To describe the predictors of recurrence in out-patients with CDI.

METHODS

Out-patient cases of CDI in Olmsted County, MN residents diagnosed between 28 June 2007 and 25 June 2010 were identified. Recurrent CDI was defined as recurrence of diarrhoea with a positive C. difficile PCR test from 15 to 56 days after the initial diagnosis with interim resolution of symptoms. Patients who had two positive tests within 14 days were excluded. Cox proportional hazard models were used to assess the association of clinical variables with time to recurrence of CDI.

RESULTS

The cohort included 520 out-patients; 104 had recurrent CDI (cumulative incidence of 17.5% by 30 days). Univariate analysis identified increasing age and antibiotic use to be associated with recurrent CDI. Severe CDI, peripheral leucocyte count and change in serum creatinine >1.5-fold were not. In a multiple variable model, concomitant antibiotic use was associated with risk of recurrent CDI (HR = 5.4, 95% CI 1.6-17.5, P = 0.005), while age (HR per 10 year increase = 1.1, 95% CI 0.9-1.3, P = 0.22); peripheral leucocyte count >15 × 10(9) /L (HR = 1.0, 95% CI 0.5-2.1, P = 0.92); and change in serum creatinine greater than 1.5-fold (HR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.4-1.5, P = 0.44) were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Antibiotic use was independently associated with a dramatic risk of recurrent Clostridium difficile infection in an out-patient cohort. It is important to avoid unnecessary systemic antibiotics in patients with Clostridium difficile infection, and patients with ongoing antibiotic use should be monitored closely for recurrent infection.

Clinical characteristics of patients who test positive for Clostridium difficile by repeat PCR

The high sensitivity of PCR assays for diagnosing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has greatly reduced the need for repeat testing after a negative result. Nevertheless, a small subset of patients do test positive within 7 days of a negative test. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics of these patients to determine when repeat testing may be appropriate. The results of all Xpert C. difficile PCR (Cepheid, Sunnyvale CA) tests performed in the clinical microbiology laboratory at New York-Presbyterian Hospital, Columbia University Medical Center (NYPH/CUMC) from 1 May 2011 through 6 September 2013, were reviewed. A retrospective case-control study was performed, comparing patients who tested positive within 7 days of a negative test result to a random selection of 50 controls who tested negative within 7 days of a negative test result. During the study period, a total of 14,875 tests were performed, of which 1,066 were repeat tests (7.2%). Eleven of these repeat tests results were positive (1.0%). The only risk factor independently associated with repeat testing positive was history of a prior CDI (odds ratio [OR], 19.6 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 4.0 to 19.5], P < 0.001). We found that patients who test positive for C. difficile by PCR within 7 days of a negative test are more likely to have a history of CDI than are patients who test negative with repeat PCR. This finding may be due to the high rate of disease relapse or the increased likelihood of empirical therapy leading to false-negative results in these patients.

Clostridium difficile infection: management strategies for a difficult disease

Clostridium difficile was first described as a cause of diarrhea in 1978 and in the last three decades has reached an epidemic state with increasing incidence and severity in both healthcare and community settings. There also has been a rise in severe outcomes from C. difficile infection (CDI). There have been tremendous advancements in the field of CDI with the identification of newer risk factors, recognition of CDI in populations previously thought not at risk and development of better diagnostic modalities. Several treatment options are available for CDI apart from metronidazole and vancomycin, and include new drugs such as fidaxomicin and other options such as fecal microbiota transplantation. This review discusses the epidemiology, risk factors and outcomes from CDI, and focuses primarily on existing and evolving treatment modalities.

Gastro 2013 APDW/WCOG Shanghai working party report: chronic diarrhea: definition, classification, diagnosis

Diarrhea is best defined as passage of loose stools often with more frequent bowel movements. For clinical purposes, the Bristol Stool Form Scale works well to distinguish stool form and to identify loose stools. Laboratory testing of stool consistency has lagged behind. Acute diarrhea is likely to be due to infection and to be self-limited. As diarrhea becomes chronic, it is less likely to be due to infection; duration of 1 month seems to work well as a cut-off for chronic diarrhea, but detailed scientific knowledge is missing about the utility of this definition. In addition to duration of diarrhea, classifications by presenting scenario, by pathophysiology, and by stool characteristics (e.g. watery, fatty, or inflammatory) may help the canny clinician refine the differential diagnosis of chronic diarrhea. In this regard, a careful history remains the essential part of the evaluation of a patient with diarrhea. Imaging the intestine with endoscopy and radiographic techniques is useful, and biopsy of the small intestine and colon for histological assessment provides key diagnostic information. Endomicroscopy and molecular pathology are only now being explored for the diagnosis of chronic diarrhea. Interest in the microbiome of the gut is increasing; aside from a handful of well-described infections because of pathogens, little is known about alterations in the microbiome in chronic diarrhea. Serological tests have well-defined roles in the diagnosis of celiac disease but have less clearly defined application in autoimmune enteropathies and inflammatory bowel disease. Measurement of peptide hormones is of value in the diagnosis and management of endocrine tumors causing diarrhea, but these are so rare that these tests are of little value in screening because there will be many more false-positives than true-positive results. Chemical analysis of stools is of use in classifying chronic diarrhea and may limit the differential diagnosis that must be considered, but interpretation of the results is still evolving. Breath tests for assessment of carbohydrate malabsorption, small bowel bacterial overgrowth, and intestinal transit are fraught with technical limitations that decrease sensitivity and specificity. Likewise, tests of bile acid malabsorption have had limited utility beyond empirical trials of bile acid sequestrants.

Clinical factors associated with development of severe-complicated Clostridium difficile infection

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) can cause life-threatening complications. Severe-complicated CDI is characterized by hypotension, shock, sepsis, ileus, megacolon, and colon perforation. We created a model to identify clinical factors associated with severe-complicated CDI.

METHODS

We analyzed data from 1446 inpatient cases of CDI (48.6% female; median age, 62.5 years; range, 0.1-103.7 years) at the Mayo Clinic from June 28, 2007, to June 25, 2010. Patients with severe-complicated CDI (n = 487) were identified as those who required admission to the intensive care unit or colectomy, or died, within 30 days of CDI diagnosis. Logistic regression models were used to identify variables that were independently associated with the occurrence of severe-complicated CDI in 2 cohorts. One cohort comprised all hospitalized patients; the other comprised a subset of these inpatients who were residents of Olmsted County, Minnesota to assess the association of comorbid conditions with the development of severe-complicated infection in a population-based cohort. The linear combinations of variables identified by using logistic regression models provided scores to predict the risk of developing severe-complicated CDI.

RESULTS

In a multivariable model that included all inpatients, increasing age, leukocyte count >15 × 10(9)/L, increase in serum level of creatinine >1.5-fold from baseline, and use of proton pump inhibitors or narcotic medications were independently associated with severe-complicated CDI. In the secondary analysis, which included only patients from Olmsted County, comorbid conditions were not significantly associated with severe-complicated CDI.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age, high numbers of leukocytes in blood samples, an increased serum level of creatinine, gastric acid suppression, and use of narcotic medications were independently associated with development of severe-complicated CDI in hospitalized patients. Early aggressive monitoring and intervention could improve outcomes.

Alerting physicians during electronic order entry effectively reduces unnecessary repeat PCR testing for Clostridium difficile

Hospital information systems (HIS) alerts restricting repeat Clostridium difficile PCR ordering by physicians in patients with a prior result within 7 days eliminated 91% of repeat tests, from 14.5% (282/1,949) repeats preintervention to 1.3% (135/10,285) postintervention. HIS alerting is an effective, targeted, patient-specific tool for improving the quality and utilization of C. difficile results.

The epidemiology of Clostridium difficile infection in children: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is increasing, even in populations previously thought to be at low risk, including children. Most incidence studies have included only hospitalized patients and are thus potentially influenced by referral or hospitalization biases.

METHODS

We performed a population-based study of CDI in pediatric residents (aged 0-18 years) of Olmsted County, Minnesota, from 1991 through 2009 to assess the incidence, severity, treatment response, and outcomes of CDI.

RESULTS

We identified 92 patients with CDI, with a median age of 2.3 years (range, 1 month-17.6 years). The majority of cases (75%) were community-acquired. The overall age- and sex-adjusted CDI incidence was 13.8 per 100 000 persons, which increased 12.5-fold, from 2.6 (1991-1997) to 32.6 per 100 000 (2004-2009), over the study period (P < .0001). The incidence of community-acquired CDI was 10.3 per 100 000 persons and increased 10.5-fold, from 2.2 (1991-1997) to 23.4 per 100 000 (2004-2009) (P < .0001). Severe, severe-complicated, and recurrent CDI occurred in 9%, 3%, and 20% of patients, respectively. The initial treatment in 82% of patients was metronidazole, and 18% experienced treatment failure. In contrast, the initial treatment in 8% of patients was vancomycin and none of them failed therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based cohort, CDI incidence in children increased significantly from 1991 through 2009. Given that the majority of cases were community-acquired, estimates of the incidence of CDI that include only hospitalized children may significantly underestimate the burden of disease in children.

Clostridium difficile infection: new insights into management

Clostridium difficile was first described as a cause of diarrhea in 1978 and is now among the leading 3 hospital-acquired infections in the United States, along with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. In the past 2 decades, there has been an increase in the incidence, severity, and recurrence rates of C difficile infection, all of which are associated with poor outcomes. In addition, several novel risk factors and newer treatment methods are emerging, including fidaxomicin therapy, treatment using monoclonal antibodies, and fecal microbiota transplantation, that have shown promise for the treatment of C difficile infection. This review focuses on the changing epidemiology, risk factors, and newer methods for treatment of C difficile infection.

Role of fecal Clostridium difficile load in discrepancies between toxin tests and PCR: is quantitation the next step in C. difficile testing?

Direct tests for Clostridium difficile are 30-50 % more sensitive than tests for C. difficile toxins but the reasons for this discrepancy are incompletely understood. In addition to toxin degradation and strain differences, we hypothesized that C. difficile concentration could be important in determining whether toxins are detected in fecal samples. We performed standard curves on an FDA-approved real-time PCR test for the C. difficile tcdB gene (Xpert C. difficile/Epi, Cepheid) during a prospective comparison of a toxin immunoassay (Meridian Premier), PCR and toxigenic culture. Immunoassay-negative, PCR-positive samples were retested with a cell cytotoxin assay (TechLab). Among 107 PCR-positive samples, 46 (43.0 %) had toxins detected by immunoassay and an additional 18 (16.8 %) had toxin detected by the cytotoxin assay yielding 64 (59.8 %) toxin-positive and 43 (40.2 %) toxin-negative samples. Overall, toxin-negative samples with C. difficile had 10(1)-10(4) fewer DNA copies than toxin-positive samples and most discrepancies between toxin tests and PCR were associated with a significant difference in C. difficile quantity. Of the toxin-positive samples, 95 % had ≥ 4.1 log(10) C. difficile tcdB DNA copies/mL; 52 % of immunoassay-negative samples and 70 % of immunoassay and cytotoxin negative samples had <4.1 log(10) C. difficile tcdB DNA copies/mL. These findings suggest that fecal C. difficile concentration is a major determinant of toxin detection and C. difficile quantitation may add to the diagnostic value of existing test methods. Future studies are needed to validate the utility of quantitation and determine the significance of low concentrations of C. difficile in the absence of detectable toxin.