Rapid and sensitive loop-mediated isothermal amplification test for Clostridium difficile detection challenges cytotoxin B cell test and culture as gold standard

Rapid Isothermal Detection of Pathogenic Clostridioides difficile Using Recombinase Polymerase Amplification

Nosocomial-associated diarrhea due to Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is diagnosed after sample precultivation by the detection of the toxins in enzyme immunoassays or via toxin gene nucleic acid amplification. Rapid and direct diagnosis is important for targeted treatment to prevent severe cases and recurrence. We developed two singleplex and a one-pot duplex fluorescent 15 min isothermal recombinase polymerase amplification (RPA) assays targeting the toxin genes A and B (tcdA and tcdB). Furthermore, we adapted the singleplex RPA to a 3D-printed microreactor device. Analytical sensitivity was determined using a DNA standard and DNA extracts of 20 C. difficile strains with different toxinotypes. Nineteen clostridial and gastrointestinal bacteria strains were used to determine analytical specificity. Adaptation of singleplex assays to duplex assays in a 50 μL volume required optimized primer and probe concentrations. A volume reduction by one-fourth (12.4 μL) was established for the 3D-printed microreactor. Mixing of RPA was confirmed as essential for optimal analytical sensitivity. Detection limits (LOD) ranging from 119 to 1411 DNA molecules detected were similar in the duplex tube format and in the singleplex 3D-printed microreactor format. The duplex RPA allows the simultaneous detection of both toxins important for the timely and reliable diagnosis of CDI. The 3D-printed reaction chamber can be developed into a microfluidic lab-on-a-chip system use at the point of care.

Characterization of a Clostridioides difficile outbreak caused by PCR ribotype 046, associated with increased mortality

This study describes a large nosocomial outbreak of Clostridioides difficile infections (CDI) dominated by ribotype (RT) 046 in a Swedish hospital. The present study aimed to examine the pathogenicity of this RT, explore epidemiological links by whole genome sequencing (WGS), and evaluate different interventions implemented to stop the outbreak. Clinical isolates (n =  366) collected during and after the outbreak were ribotyped and 246 isolates were subjected to WGS. Medical records of patients infected with the seven most common RTs were evaluated. RT046 was spread effectively throughout the hospital and was the most common among the 44 different RTs found (114/366 isolates). Infection with RT046 was associated with higher mortality compared to other strains (20.2% to 7.8%), although there were no differences in concomitant disease, age or antibiotic treatment. To control the outbreak, several measures were successfully implemented.

Development and Clinical Application of a Rapid and Visual Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Test for tetM gene in Clostridioides difficile Strains Cultured from Feces

OBJECTIVES

To develop a rapid and visual loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay targeting the tetM gene in Clostridioides difficile (C. difficile) strains cultured from feces.

METHODS

Primers were designed to recognize the tetM gene in C. difficile by LAMP, using turbidity and visual detection. The sensitivity and specificity of LAMP primers was determined. Besides, We conducted both LAMP and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the tcdA, tcdB, cdtA, cdtB, ermB, tetM genes in 300 toxigenic C. difficile strains cultured from feces.

RESULTS

The target DNA was amplified and visualized within 60 minutes at a temperature of 62°C. A total of 26 bacterial strains were found negative for tetM, which manifested high specificity of the primers. The detection limit of LAMP was 36.1 pg/µl, which was 100-fold more sensitive than PCR. The positive rate of tetM in toxigenic C. difficile strains cultured from feces was 93.3% by both LAMP and PCR. The proportion of toxin types in those C. difficile strains was 95.7% for A+B+CDT-, 4% for A-B+CDT-, and 0.3% for A+B+CDT+, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study examining tetM gene in C. difficile strains cultured from feces by LAMP. Its high specificity and sensitivity, as well as visual detection, make the new assay a powerful diagnostic tool for rapid testing.

An Update on Clostridioides difficile Binary Toxin

Infection with Clostridioides difficile (CDI), a common healthcare-associated infection, includes symptoms ranging from mild diarrhea to severe cases of pseudomembranous colitis. Toxin A (TcdA) and toxin B (TcdB) cause cytotoxicity and cellular detachment from intestinal epithelium and are responsible for CDI symptomatology. Approximately 20% of C. difficile strains produce a binary toxin (CDT) encoded by the tcdA and tcdB genes, which is thought to enhance TcdA and TcdB toxicity; however, the role of CDT in CDI remains controversial. Here, we focused on describing the main features of CDT and its impact on the host, clinical relevance, epidemiology, and potential therapeutic approaches.

Impact of ribotype on Clostridioides difficile diagnostics

This study investigates the performance of diagnostic methods for detection of Clostridioides difficile infection in Sweden, including impact of PCR ribotype on diagnostic performance. Between 2011 and 2016, a total of 17,878 stool samples from 26 laboratories were tested by either well-type enzyme immunoassays (EIAs), membrane bound EIAs, cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CTA), or nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) and subsequently cultured for C. difficile. Roughly half of the samples (9454/17878) were subjected to diagnostic testing both on the fecal sample and on the 1323 isolated C. difficile strains. All C. difficile isolates were typed by PCR ribotyping, and the isolates were classified as toxigenic or non-toxigenic based on the empirical knowledge of the association between toxin-positivity and ribotype. The overall sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were highest for NAATs and membrane EIAs. Ribotype-specific sensitivity varied greatly between methods and ribotypes. All methods had 100% sensitivity against ribotype 027 and 013. For other types, the sensitivity ranged from 33 to 85% in fecal samples and from 78 to 100% on isolates. For the most prevalent ribotypes (014, 020, and 001), the sensitivity varied between 38 and 100% in the fecal samples, with the lowest sensitivity observed for well-type EIAs and CTA. The large variation in diagnostic sensitivity implies that type distribution significantly affects the outcome when evaluating diagnostic performance. Furthermore, performing comparative studies of diagnostic tests in settings with high prevalence of ribotype 027 will overestimate the general performance of diagnostic tests.

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.

Implications of direct amplification for measuring antimicrobial resistance using point-of-care devices

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is recognized as a global threat to human health. Rapid detection and characterization of AMR is a critical component of most antibiotic stewardship programs. Methods based on amplification of nucleic acids for detection of AMR are generally faster than culture-based approaches but they still require several hours to more than a day due to the need for transporting the sample to a centralized laboratory, processing of sample, and sometimes DNA purification and concentration. Nucleic acids-based point-of-care (POC) devices are capable of rapidly diagnosing antibiotic-resistant infections which may help in making timely and correct treatment decisions. However, for most POC platforms, sample processing for nucleic acids extraction and purification is also generally required prior to amplification. Direct amplification, an emerging possibility for a number of polymerases, has the potential to eliminate these steps without significantly impacting diagnostic performance. This review summarizes direct amplification methods and their implication for rapid measurement of AMR. Future research directions that may further strengthen the possibility of integrating direct amplification methods with POC devices are also summarized.

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.

Predictors of Clostridium difficile infection-related mortality among older adults

BACKGROUND

Over 90% of annual deaths caused by Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) occur in persons aged ≥65 years. However, no large-scale studies have been conducted to investigate predictors of CDI-related mortality among older adults.

METHODS

This case-control study included 540 CDI patients aged ≥60 years admitted to a tertiary care hospital in Detroit, Michigan, between January 2005 and December 2012. Cases were CDI patients who died within 30 days of CDI date. Controls were CDI patients who survived >30 days after CDI date. Cases were matched to controls on a 1:3 ratio based on age and hospital acquisition of CDI.

RESULTS

One-hundred and thirty cases (25%) were compared with 405 controls (75%). Independent predictors of CDI-related mortality included admission from another acute hospital (odds ratio [OR], 8.25; P = .001) or a long-term care facility (OR, 13.12; P = .012), McCabe score ≥2 (OR, 12.19; P < .001), and high serum creatinine (≥1.7 mg/dL) (OR, 3.43; P = .021). The regression model was adjusted for the confounding effect of limited activity of daily living score, total number of antibiotic days prior to CDI, ileus on abdominal radiograph, low albumin (≤2.5 g/dL), elevated white blood cell count (>15 × 1,000/mm³), and admission to intensive care unit because of CDI.

CONCLUSIONS

Predictors of CDI-related mortality reported in this study could be applied to the development of a bedside scoring system for older adults with CDI.

Clostridium difficile infection diagnostics - evaluation of the C. DIFF Quik Chek Complete assay, a rapid enzyme immunoassay for detection of toxigenic C. difficile in clinical stool samples

Diagnostic testing for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has, in recent years, seen the introduction of rapid dual-EIA (enzyme immunoassay) tests combining species-specific glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) with toxin A/B. In a prospective study, we compared the C. DIFF Quik Chek Complete test to a combination of selective culture (SC) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) of the toxin A gene. Of 419 specimens, 68 were positive in SC including 62 positive in LAMP (14.7%). The combined EIA yielded 82 GDH positives of which 47 were confirmed toxin A/B positive (11%) corresponding to a sensitivity and specificity of 94% for GDH EIA compared to SC and for toxin A/B EIA a sensitivity of 71% and a specificity of 99% compared to LAMP. Twenty different PCR ribotypes were evenly distributed except for UK 081 where only 25% were toxin A/B positive compared to LAMP. We propose a primary use of a combined GDH toxin A/B EIA permitting a sensitive 1-h result of 379 of 419 (90%, all negatives plus GDH and toxin EIA positives) referred specimens. The remaining 10% being GDH positive should be tested for toxin A/B gene on the same day and positive results left to a final decision by the physician.

Risk factors associated with interfacility transfers among patients with Clostridium difficile infection

BACKGROUND

Preventing the transmission of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) over the continuum of care presents an important challenge for infection control.

METHODS

A prospective case-control study was conducted on patients admitted with CDI to a tertiary care hospital in Detroit between August 2012 and September 2013. Patients were then followed for 1 year by telephone interviews and the hospital administrative database. Cases, patients with interfacility transfers (IFTs), were patients admitted to our facility from another health care facility and discharged to long-term care (LTC) facilities. Controls were patients admitted from and discharged to home.

RESULTS

There were 143 patients included in the study. Thirty-six (30%) cases were compared with 84 (70%) controls. Independent risk factors of CDI patients with IFTs (compared with CDI patients without IFTs) included Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥6 (odds ratio [OR], 5.30; P = .016) and hospital-acquired CDI (OR, 4.92; P = .023). Patients with IFTs were more likely to be readmitted within 90 days of discharge than patients without IFTs (OR, 2.24; P = .046). One-year mortality rate was significantly higher among patients with IFTs than among patients without IFTs (OR, 4.33; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

With the growing number of alternate health care centers, it is highly critical to establish better collaboration between acute care and LTC facilities to tackle the increasing burden of CDI across the health care system.

European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases: update of the diagnostic guidance document for Clostridium difficile infection

In 2009 the first European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) guideline for diagnosing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) was launched. Since then newer tests for diagnosing CDI have become available, especially nucleic acid amplification tests. The main objectives of this update of the guidance document are to summarize the currently available evidence concerning laboratory diagnosis of CDI and to formulate and revise recommendations to optimize CDI testing. This update is essential to improve the diagnosis of CDI and to improve uniformity in CDI diagnosis for surveillance purposes among Europe. An electronic search for literature concerning the laboratory diagnosis of CDI was performed. Studies evaluating a commercial laboratory test compared to a reference test were also included in a meta-analysis. The commercial tests that were evaluated included enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) detecting glutamate dehydrogenase, EIAs detecting toxins A and B and nucleic acid amplification tests. Recommendations were formulated by an executive committee, and the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence were graded using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. No single commercial test can be used as a stand-alone test for diagnosing CDI as a result of inadequate positive predictive values at low CDI prevalence. Therefore, the use of a two-step algorithm is recommended. Samples without free toxin detected by toxins A and B EIA but with positive glutamate dehydrogenase EIA, nucleic acid amplification test or toxigenic culture results need clinical evaluation to discern CDI from asymptomatic carriage.

Fecal Microbiota Transplant

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has steadily increased in incidence since the 1990s, with an associated increase in recurrence and severity, which has in turn lead to more intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. The development of recurrent CDI, in particular, has been associated with increasing patient morbidity and mortality as well as an immense financial burden on the health care system. Recently, fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) has received much publicity as an effective means of treatment for recurrent CDI. The goal of this review is to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of CDI, with a particular focus on FMT and its utilization in the ICU.

Clostridium difficile infection: epidemiology, diagnosis and understanding transmission

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) continues to affect patients in hospitals and communities worldwide. The spectrum of clinical disease ranges from mild diarrhoea to toxic megacolon, colonic perforation and death. However, this bacterium might also be carried asymptomatically in the gut, potentially leading to 'silent' onward transmission. Modern technologies, such as whole-genome sequencing and multi-locus variable-number tandem-repeat analysis, are helping to track C. difficile transmission across health-care facilities, countries and continents, offering the potential to illuminate previously under-recognized sources of infection. These typing strategies have also demonstrated heterogeneity in terms of CDI incidence and strain types reflecting different stages of epidemic spread. However, comparison of CDI epidemiology, particularly between countries, is challenging due to wide-ranging approaches to sampling and testing. Diagnostic strategies for C. difficile are complicated both by the wide range of bacterial targets and tests available and the need to differentiate between toxin-producing and non-toxigenic strains. Multistep diagnostic algorithms have been recommended to improve sensitivity and specificity. In this Review, we describe the latest advances in the understanding of C. difficile epidemiology, transmission and diagnosis, and discuss the effect of these developments on the clinical management of CDI.

Gastrointestinal Infections

Establishing a specific etiology for gastrointestinal infections can be challenging because of the common clinical features and wide variety of causative microorganisms. In many cases, the etiologic agent cannot be determined using traditional diagnostic methods and may result in unnecessary antibiotic use or prolonged periods of illness. Molecular tests provide many advantages over traditional laboratory methods but, with the exception of a few analytes, are still largely in the developmental phase for gastrointestinal pathogens and are not widely used. The main advantages of molecular tests include increased sensitivity and the ability to detect agents which will not grow in culture. To test for all possible gastrointestinal pathogens at one time would require a large panel that would include a variety of bacterial, viral and parasitic agents. Challenges inherent in developing diagnostic molecular panels include ensuring that all variants of a particular microorganism can be detected as well as the rapid evolution of pathogens. In this chapter, the diagnostic merit of molecular tests as well as available tests will be presented for the major groups of gastrointestinal pathogens.

Rapid detection of ermB gene in Clostridium difficile by loop-mediated isothermal amplification

Macrolide-lincosamide-streptogramin B resistance in Clostridium difficile is mostly due to the ermB resistance determinant. Here, we describe a sensitive and rapid molecular method to detect ermB in C. difficile to contribute to the wider epidemiological study. Five sets of loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) primers were designed and optimized for rapid detection of ermB. The specificity and sensitivity of the primers for ermB were detected, and the ermB LAMP assay was compared to conventional PCR with 80 clinical isolates of C. difficile. Real-time monitoring of turbidity and chromogenic reaction were used to determine negative and positive results. A total of 26 pathogenic bacterial strains of different species were found to be negative for ermB, which indicated the high specificity of the primers. ermB was detected in 78.8 % (63/80) of the clinical isolates by both LAMP and conventional PCR. The detection limit of LAMP was 36.1  pg DNA μl- 1 and its sensitivity was 10-fold greater than that of conventional PCR. This study is the first report regarding the development and application of the LAMP assay for detection of the ermB gene in C. difficile strains. The developed LAMP method is sensitive, specific and provides a user-friendly visual approach for the rapid detection of ermB-bearing C. difficile.

Diagnostic accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification in detection of Clostridium difficile in stool samples: a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) remains a diagnostic challenge for clinicians. More recently, loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) has become readily available for the diagnosis of CDI, and many studies have investigated the usefulness of LAMP for rapid and accurate diagnosis of CDI. However, the overall diagnostic accuracy of LAMP for CDI remains unclear. In this meta-analysis, our aim was to establish the overall diagnostic accuracy of LAMP in detection of Clostridium difficile (CD) in stool samples.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A search was done in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases up to February 2014 to identify published studies that evaluated the diagnostic role of LAMP for CD. Methodological quality was assessed according to the quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy (QUADAS) instrument. The sensitivities (SEN), specificities (SPE), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were pooled statistically using random effects models. Statistical analysis was performed by employing Meta-Disc 1.4 software. Summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were used to summarize overall test performance. Funnel plots were used to test the potential publication bias.

RESULT

A total of 9 studies met inclusion criteria for the present meta-analysis. The pooled SEN and SPE for diagnosing CD were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91-0.95) and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.98-0.99), respectively. The PLR was 47.72 (95% CI: 15.10-150.82), NLR was 0.07 (95% CI: 0.04-0.14) and DOR was 745.19 (95% CI: 229.30-2421.72). The area under the ROC was 0.98. Meta-regression indicated that the total number of samples was a source of heterogeneity for LAMP in detection of CD. The funnel plots suggested no publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The LAMP meets the minimum desirable characteristics of a diagnostic test of SEN, SPE and other measures of accuracy in the diagnosis of CD, and it is suitable as a rapid, effective and reliable stand-alone diagnostic test for diagnosis of CDI, potentially decreasing morbidity and nosocomial spread of CD.

Multiplex Real-Time PCR Method for Simultaneous Identification and Toxigenic Type Characterization of Clostridium difficile From Stool Samples

Background

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a multiplex real-time PCR assay for simultaneous identification and toxigenic type characterization of Clostridium difficile.

Methods

The multiplex real-time PCR assay targeted and simultaneously detected triose phosphate isomerase (tpi) and binary toxin (cdtA) genes, and toxin A (tcdA) and B (tcdB) genes in the first and sec tubes, respectively. The results of multiplex real-time PCR were compared to those of the BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay, targeting the tcdB gene alone. The toxigenic culture was used as the reference, where toxin genes were detected by multiplex real-time PCR.

Results

A total of 351 stool samples from consecutive patients were included in the study. Fifty-five stool samples (15.6%) were determined to be positive for the presence of C. difficile by using multiplex real-time PCR. Of these, 48 (87.2%) were toxigenic (46 tcdA and tcdB-positive, two positive for only tcdB) and 11 (22.9%) were cdtA-positive. The sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) of the multiplex real-time PCR compared with the toxigenic culture were 95.6%, 98.6%, 91.6%, and 99.3%, respectively. The analytical sensitivity of the multiplex real-time PCR assay was determined to be 103colonyforming unit (CFU)/g spiked stool sample and 0.0625 pg genomic DNA from culture. Analytical specificity determined by using 15 enteric and non-clostridial reference strains was 100%.

Conclusions

The multiplex real-time PCR assay accurately detected C. difficile isolates from diarrheal stool samples and characterized its toxin genes in a single PCR run.

Accuracy of loop-mediated isothermal amplification for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review

Loop-mediated isothermal DNA amplification (LAMP) is currently used as standalone diagnostic test for C. difficile infection (CDI). We assessed the diagnostic accuracy of LAMP for the diagnosis of CDI. We searched 5 databases to identify studies that compared LAMP with culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay or anaerobic toxigenic culture (TC) of C. difficile. We used the random-effects model to calculate pooled sensitivities, specificities, diagnostic odds ratios, and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The search of the databases yielded 16 studies (6979 samples) that met inclusion criteria. When TC was used as the gold standard (6572 samples), bivariate analysis yielded a mean sensitivity of 0.95 (95% CI, 0.93-0.97; I(2)=67.4) and a mean specificity of 0.99 (95% CI, 0.96-1.00; I(2)=97.0). LAMP is a useful diagnostic tool with high sensitivity and specificity for detecting CDI. The results should, however, be interpreted only in the presence of clinical suspicion and symptoms of CDI.

Diagnosis and treatment of Clostridium difficile in adults: a systematic review

IMPORTANCE

Since 2000, the incidence and severity of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) have increased.

OBJECTIVE

To review current evidence regarding best practices for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in adults (age ≥ 18 years).

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Ovid MEDLINE and Cochrane databases were searched using keywords relevant to the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in adults. Articles published between January 1978 and October 31, 2014, were selected for inclusion based on targeted keyword searches, manual review of bibliographies, and whether the article was a guideline, systematic review, or meta-analysis published within the past 10 years. Of 4682 articles initially identified, 196 were selected for full review. Of these, the most pertinent 116 articles were included. Clinical trials, large observational studies, and more recently published articles were prioritized in the selection process.

FINDINGS

Laboratory testing cannot distinguish between asymptomatic colonization and symptomatic infection with C difficile. Diagnostic approaches are complex due to the availability of multiple testing strategies. Multistep algorithms using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for the toxin gene(s) or single-step PCR on liquid stool samples have the best test performance characteristics (for multistep: sensitivity was 0.68-1.00 and specificity was 0.92-1.00; and for single step: sensitivity was 0.86-0.92 and specificity was 0.94-0.97). Vancomycin and metronidazole are first-line therapies for most patients, although treatment failures have been associated with metronidazole in severe or complicated cases of CDI. Recent data demonstrate clinical success rates of 66.3% for metronidazole vs 78.5% for vancomycin for severe CDI. Newer therapies show promising results, including fidaxomicin (similar clinical cure rates to vancomycin, with lower recurrence rates for fidaxomicin, 15.4% vs vancomycin, 25.3%; P = .005) and fecal microbiota transplantation (response rates of 83%-94% for recurrent CDI).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Diagnostic testing for CDI should be performed only in symptomatic patients. Treatment strategies should be based on disease severity, history of prior CDI, and the individual patient's risk of recurrence. Vancomycin is the treatment of choice for severe or complicated CDI, with or without adjunctive therapies. Metronidazole is appropriate for mild disease. Fidaxomicin is a therapeutic option for patients with recurrent CDI or a high risk of recurrence. Fecal microbiota transplantation is associated with symptom resolution of recurrent CDI but its role in primary and severe CDI is not established.

Evaluation of an automated rapid diagnostic test for detection of Clostridium difficile

The Verigene Clostridium difficile Nucleic Acid Test (Verigene CDF Test) (Nanosphere, Northbrook, IL, USA) is a new multiplex qualitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test used to detect C. difficile toxin genes in fecal specimens. To evaluate the performance of the new method, we tested 69 fecal samples from patients with suspected C. difficile infection using the Verigene CDF test, an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and PCR following anaerobic fecal culture. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of the Verigene CDF test were 96.7% (29/30), 97.4% (38/39), and 97.1% (67/69) respectively, using PCR following fecal culture as a reference method. We also analyzed the potential clinical impact of the Verigene CDF test using chart reviews of the 69 patients with suspected C. difficile infection and found that 11 of the 69 patients were incorrectly diagnosed, and the Verigene CDF test would have led to them receiving more appropriate management including practice of treatment and contact precaution, although, of the 69 patients, there are two whose samples were incorrectly identified with the Verigene CDF test. The Verigene CDF test will have a positive impact on patient care.

Loop-mediated isothermal amplification of DNA (LAMP): a new diagnostic tool lights the world of diagnosis of animal and human pathogens: a review

Diagnosis is an important part in case of animal husbandry as treatment of a disease depends on it. Advancement in molecular biology has generated various sophisticated tools like Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR), its versions along with pen-side diagnostic techniques. Every diagnostic test however has both advantages and disadvantages; PCR is not an exception to this statement. To ease the odds faced by PCR several non-PCR techniques which can amplify DNA at a constant temperature has become the need of hour, thus generating a variety of isothermal amplification techniques including Nucleic Acid Sequence-Based Amplification (NASBA) along with Self-Sustained Sequence Replication (3SR) and Strand Displacement Amplification (SDA) and Loop mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) test. LAMP stands out to be a good and effective diagnostic test for empowering in developing countries as it does not require sophisticated equipments and skilled personnel and proves to be cost-effective. Performance of LAMP mainly relies on crafting of six primers (including 2 loop primers) ultimately accelerating the reaction. LAMP amplifies DNA in the process pyrophosphates are formed causing turbidity that facilitates visualisation in a more effective way than PCR. The Bst and Bsm polymerase are the required enzymes for LAMP that does not possess 5'-3' exonuclease activity. Results can be visualized by adding DNA binding dye, SYBR green. LAMP is more stable than PCR and real-time PCR. Non-involvement of template DNA preparation and ability to generate 10(9) copies of DNA are added benefits that make it more effective than NASBA or 3SR and SDA. Thus, it fetches researcher's interest in developing various versions of LAMP viz., its combination with lateral flow assay or micro LAMP and more recently lyophilized and electric (e) LAMP. Availability of ready to use LAMP kits has helped diagnosis of almost all pathogens. LAMP associated technologies however needs to be developed as a part of LAMP platform rather than developing them as separate entities. This review deals with all these salient features of this newly developed tool that has enlightened the world of diagnosis.

Clostridium difficile infection diagnosis in a paediatric population: comparison of methodologies

The increasing incidence of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in paediatric hospitalised populations, combined with the emergence of hypervirulent strains, community-acquired CDI and the need for prompt treatment and infection control, makes the rapid, accurate diagnosis of CDI crucial. We validated commonly used C. difficile diagnostic tests in a paediatric hospital population. From October 2011 to January 2012, 150 consecutive stools were collected from 75 patients at a tertiary paediatric hospital in Perth, Western Australia. Stools were tested using: C. Diff Quik Chek Complete, Illumigene C. difficile, GeneOhm Cdiff, cycloserine cefoxitin fructose agar (CCFA) culture, and cell culture cytotoxin neutralisation assay (CCNA). The reference standard was growth on CCFA or Cdiff Chromagar and PCR on isolates to detect tcdA, tcdB, cdtA, and cdtB. Isolates were PCR ribotyped. The prevalence of CDI was high (43 % of patients). Quik Chek Complete glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) demonstrated a low negative predictive value (NPV) (93 %). Both CCNA and Quik Chek Complete toxin A/B had poor sensitivity (33 % and 29 % respectively). Molecular methods both had 89 % sensitivity. Algorithms using GDH + Illumigene or GeneOhm reduced the sensitivity to 85 % and 83 % respectively. Ribotype UK014/20 predominated. GDH NPV and GeneOhm and Illumigene sensitivities were reduced compared with adult studies. Quik Chek Complete and CCNA cannot reliably detect toxigenic CDI. A GDH first algorithm showed reduced sensitivity. In a high prevalence paediatric population, molecular methods alone are recommended over the use of GDH algorithm or culture and CCNA, as they demonstrate the best test performance characteristics.

Advanced techniques for detection and identification of microbial agents of gastroenteritis

Gastroenteritis persists as a worldwide problem, responsible for approximately 2 million deaths annually. Traditional diagnostic methods used in the clinical microbiology laboratory include a myriad of tests, such as culture, microscopy, and immunodiagnostics, which can be labor intensive and suffer from long turnaround times and, in some cases, poor sensitivity. [corrected]. This article reviews recent advances in genomic and proteomic technologies that have been applied to the detection and identification of gastrointestinal pathogens. These methods simplify and speed up the detection of pathogenic microorganisms, and their implementation in the clinical microbiology laboratory has potential to revolutionize the diagnosis of gastroenteritis.

tcdA As a diagnostic target in a loop-mediated amplification assay for detecting toxigenic Clostridium difficile

BACKGROUND

The illumigene® (Meridian Bioscience, Inc., Cincinnati, OH) and GeneOhm® (BD Diagnostics, La Jolla, CA) Clostridium difficile assays target the tcdA gene and tcdB gene, respectively. We assessed the use of tcdA as the molecular target in the illumigene® C. difficile loop-mediated amplification assay in detecting a wide variety of C. difficile strains including those with tcdA deletions.

METHODS

We tested 38 C. difficile strains and 108 patient stool specimens using the illumigene® assay. The GeneOhm® real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay served as the reference method. Discordant results were resolved by repeat testing, anaerobic culture, and a laboratory-developed real-time PCR targeting tcdA and tcdB.

RESULTS

Both illumigene® and GeneOhm® assays detected all 37 C. difficile toxin B(+) strains representing seven toxinotypes and including four toxin A(-) B(+) isolates. No cross-reactivity with 20 other Clostridium species or toxin-negative C. difficile was observed in either assay. Among patient stool specimens, agreement was 94.4% (102/108). After discordant result resolution, agreement was 96.3% (104/108). Specimens with initially discordant results had target concentrations approaching the limit of detection for the two commercial assays. Discordance appeared unrelated to whether tcdA or tcdB was the amplification target.

CONCLUSION

The tcdA 5' region used by the illumigene® assay is a practical target for toxigenic C. difficile detection.

Multicenter evaluation of the Quidel Lyra Direct C. difficile nucleic acid amplification assay

Clostridium difficile is a Gram-positive bacterium commonly found in health care and long-term-care facilities and is the most common cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. Rapid detection of this bacterium can assist physicians in implementing contact precautions and appropriate antibiotic therapy in a timely manner. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical performance of the Quidel Lyra Direct C. difficile assay (Lyra assay) (Quidel, San Diego, CA) to that of a direct cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) and enhanced toxigenic culture. This study was performed at three geographically diverse laboratories within the United States using residual stool specimens submitted for routine C. difficile testing. Residual samples were tested using the Lyra assay on three real-time PCR platforms, and results were compared to those for direct CCNA and enhanced toxigenic culture. The test results for all platforms were consistent across all three test sites. The sensitivity and specificity of the Lyra assay on the SmartCycler II, ABI 7500 Fast DX, and ABI QuantStudio DX instruments compared to CCNA were 90.0% and 93.3%, 95.0% and 94.2%, and 93.8% and 95.0%, respectively. Compared to enhanced toxigenic culture, the sensitivity and specificity of the Lyra assay on the SmartCycler II, ABI 7500, and QuantStudio instruments were 82.1% and 96.9%, 89.3% and 98.8%, and 85.7% and 99.0%, respectively. Overall, the Lyra assay is easy to use and versatile and compares well to C. difficile culture methods.

Transmission of Clostridium difficile spores in isolation room environments and through hospital beds

The aim of this study was to determine the dissemination of Clostridium difficile (CD) spores in a hospital setting where the potassium monopersulfate-based disinfectant Virkon™ was used for cleaning. In the initial part of the study, we sampled 16 areas of frequent patient contact in 10 patient rooms where a patient with CD infection (CDI) had been accommodated. In the second part of the study, we obtained samples from 10 patient beds after discharge of CDI patients, both before and after the beds were cleaned. In the first part, CDspores were isolated in only 30% of the rooms. In the second part, which focused on transmission to hospital beds, C. difficile was found in four of 10 beds either before or after cleaning. In conclusion, in both parts of the study, we demonstrated a moderate spread of CD spores to the environment despite routine cleaning procedures involving Virkon™.

Comparison of Illumigene, Simplexa, and AmpliVue Clostridium difficile molecular assays for diagnosis of C. difficile infection

We compared the performance of the Simplexa Universal Direct (Focus Diagnostics) and AmpliVue (Quidel Corporation) assays to that of the Illumigene assay (Meridian Bioscience, Inc.) for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection. Two hundred deidentified remnant diarrheal stool specimens were tested by the Simplexa, AmpliVue, and Illumigene methods. Specimens with discrepant results among the three assays and a representative number of concordant specimens were further evaluated by toxigenic culture. The sensitivity and specificity were 98 and 100% and 96 and 100% for the Simplexa Universal Direct and AmpliVue assays, respectively. Both assays are easy to perform, with rapid turn-around-times, supporting their utility in the clinical laboratory as routine diagnostic platforms.

Multicenter evaluation of the Verigene Clostridium difficile nucleic acid assay

The Verigene Clostridium difficile Nucleic Acid test (Verigene CDF test) (Nanosphere, Northbrook, IL) is a multiplex qualitative PCR assay that utilizes a nanoparticle-based array hybridization method to detect C. difficile tcdA and tcdB in fecal specimens. In addition, the assay detects binary toxin gene sequences and the single base pair deletion at nucleotide 117 (Δ 117) in tcdC to provide a presumptive identification of the epidemic strain 027/NAP1/BI (referred to here as ribotype 027). This study compared the Verigene CDF test with anaerobic direct and enriched toxigenic culture on stool specimens from symptomatic patients among five geographically diverse laboratories within the United States. The Verigene CDF test was performed according to the manufacturer's instructions, and the reference methods performed by a central laboratory included direct culture onto cycloserine cefoxitin fructose agar (CCFA) and enriched culture using cycloserine cefoxitin mannitol broth with taurocholate and lysozyme. Recovered isolates were identified as C. difficile using gas liquid chromatography and were tested for toxin using a cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay. Strains belonging to ribotype 027 were determined by PCR ribotyping and bidirectional sequencing for Δ 117 in tcdC. A total of 1,875 specimens were evaluable. Of these, 275 specimens (14.7%) were culture positive by either direct or enriched culture methods. Compared to direct culture alone, the overall sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for the Verigene CDF test were 98.7%, 87.5%, 42%, and 99.9%, respectively. Compared to combined direct and enriched culture results, the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of the Verigene CDF test were 90.9%, 92.5%, 67.6%, and 98.3%, respectively. Of the 250 concordantly culture-positive specimens, 59 (23.6%) were flagged as "hypervirulent"; 53 were confirmed as ribotype 027, and all 59 possessed Δ 117 in tcdC. Time to results was approximately 2.5 h per specimen. The Verigene CDF test is a novel nucleic acid microarray that reliably detects both C. difficile toxins A and B in unformed stool specimens and appears to adequately identify ribotype 027 isolates.

Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infections: there is light at the end of the colon

Single molecular or multistep assays (glutamate dehydrogenase, toxin A/B, ± molecular) are recommended for the diagnosis of CDI in patients with clinically significant diarrhea. Rapid and accurate tests can improve resource allocations and improve patient care. Enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for toxins A/B is too insensitive for use as a stand-alone assay. This guideline will examine the use of molecular tests and multitest algorithms for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). These new tests, alone or in a multistep algorithm consisting of >1 assay, are more expensive than the older EIA assays; however, rapid and accurate testing can save money overall by initiating appropriate treatment and infection control protocols sooner and by possibly reducing length of hospital stay. We recommend testing only unformed stool in patients with clinically significant diarrhea by a molecular method or by a 2- to 3-step algorithm.

Evaluation of the rapid loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay Illumigene for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile in an outbreak situation

An outbreak of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) at Höglandet Hospital Eksjö in southern Sweden in 2011 was mainly due to a multidrug-resistant PCR ribotype 046 (30% of all samples). Diagnostics used routinely was the Vidas CDAB assay, but to control the outbreak the rapid loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay Illumigene was introduced and both techniques were compared to Toxigenic culture (TC) prospectively. The LAMP assay had a superior sensitivity, that is, 98% compared to 79% for the Vidas CDAB assay. Most importantly, the mean turn-around-time from collecting sample to result was reduced from 59 h to 2 h enabling early isolation of patients and effective hygiene precautions. This may potentially decrease the morbidity and nosocomial transmissions of C. difficile.

Epidemiology, diagnosis and treatment of Clostridium difficile infection

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is considered to be the main cause of bacterial infectious diarrhea in nosocomial settings. Since the beginning of the new century a continuous rise in the incidence of severe CDI has been observed worldwide. Even though some CDI cases are not associated with previous antibiotic exposure, this remains as the principal risk factor for the development of CDI. The rate of recurrences represents perhaps one the most challenging aspect on the management of CDI. There are several microbiological tests available, but glutamate dehydrogenase antigen test can be selected as the first screening step in a diagnostic algorithm, with positive samples then confirmed using a toxin(s) test, to distinguish toxinogenic from nontoxinogenic CDI. Although metronidazole and vancomycin are and have been the mainstay treatment options for CDI, there are some unmet medical and therapeutical needs. Usually oral metronidazole is recommended for initial treatment of nonsevere CDI and vancomycin for treatment of severe disease. Fidaxomicin may be considered in patients who cannot tolerate vancomycin, although more data are needed. For treatment of a nonsevere initial recurrence of CDI, oral metronidazole should be used, but for treatment of subsequent recurrences or more severe cases fidaxomicin may be helpful.

Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of Clostridium difficile infections

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a leading cause of hospital-associated gastrointestinal illness and places a high burden on our health-care system. Patients with CDI typically have extended lengths-of-stay in hospitals, and CDI is a frequent cause of large hospital outbreaks of disease. This guideline provides recommendations for the diagnosis and management of patients with CDI as well as for the prevention and control of outbreaks while supplementing previously published guidelines. New molecular diagnostic stool tests will likely replace current enzyme immunoassay tests. We suggest treatment of patients be stratified depending on whether they have mild-to-moderate, severe, or complicated disease. Therapy with metronidazole remains the choice for mild-to-moderate disease but may not be adequate for patients with severe or complicated disease. We propose a classification of disease severity to guide therapy that is useful for clinicians. We review current treatment options for patients with recurrent CDI and recommendations for the control and prevention of outbreaks of CDI.

Evaluation of an algorithmic approach in comparison with the Illumigene assay for laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection

The following three diagnostic algorithms were evaluated in comparison with the Illumigene assay as a stand-alone test for Clostridium difficile detection: glutamate dehydrogenase antigen screen (GDH) followed by toxin A/B antigen testing (Tox A/B) with the cell cytotoxicity assay for discordant specimens (algorithm 1), GDH followed by the Illumigene (algorithm 2), and GDH followed by Tox A/B with the Illumigene for discordant specimens (algorithm 3). A total of 428 stool specimens submitted to three clinical microbiology laboratories in Manitoba, Canada, for C. difficile detection between June 2011 and April 2012 were included in the study. The prevalence of C. difficile in the stool specimens was 14.7% (63/428) based on toxigenic culture (microbiologic reference standard). The sensitivity and specificity of the Illumigene for C. difficile detection were 73.0% and 99.7%, respectively. The corresponding sensitivities and specificities were 65.1% and 100.0% for algorithm 1, 68.3% and 100.0% for algorithm 2, and 69.8% and 100.0% for algorithm 3. Using algorithm 1, a cell cytotoxicity assay was required for toxin detection in 37% of positive tests, prolonging turnaround time. However, the predictive value of a positive test based on a clinical reference standard (all tests positive or cytotoxigenic culture positive and clinical disease on chart review) was slightly higher with algorithm 1 than with the Illumigene assay as a stand-alone test or as part of an algorithm (algorithms 2 and 3). Based on a reduction in turnaround time, simplicity, and acceptable sensitivity and specificity, we recommend algorithm 2 (screening with the GDH antigen test and confirmatory testing with the Illumigene).

Evaluation of Clostridium difficile fecal load and limit of detection during a prospective comparison of two molecular tests, the illumigene C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi tests

In a large prospective comparison, the illumigene test detected Clostridium difficile in 98% of toxin-positive and 58% of toxin-negative samples confirmed positive by other methods. The Xpert was uniformly sensitive. Most samples with discrepant results had C. difficile concentrations below the illumigene limit of detection. The significance of low-level C. difficile detection needs investigation.

Technical and Clinical Niches for Point of Care Molecular Devices

A point of care (POC) device is one that is used outside of a central laboratory environment; generally near , or at the site of the patient/client. Point of care testing (POCT) varies from tests performed in physician’s office labs, or “satellite” or “stat” labs, to tests performed on tabletop instruments in a clinic area, to testing performed with hand-held instruments at the bedside. In peripheral lab settings, POCT may be performed by trained laboratory staff, but clinic and bedside POCT is frequently performed by staff who lack specialized laboratory training and whose primary job is something other than doing lab tests.

Performance of Clostridium difficile toxin enzyme immunoassay and nucleic acid amplification tests stratified by patient disease severity

Many clinical laboratories in the United States are transitioning from toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIA) to nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) as the primary diagnostic test for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI). While it is known that the analytical sensitivity of the toxin EIA is poor, there are limited clinical data on the performance of these assays for patients with mild or severe CDI. Two hundred ninety-six hospital inpatients with diarrhea and clinical suspicion for CDI were tested prospectively by toxin EIA, by C. difficile NAAT, and with a reference standard toxigenic culture. Following completion of laboratory testing, retrospective chart reviews were performed to stratify patients into mild and severe disease groups based on clinical criteria using a standard point-based system. One hundred forty-three patients with CDI confirmed by toxigenic culture were evaluated in this study. Among the patients with mild CDI, 49% tested positive by toxin EIA and 98% tested positive by NAAT. Among patients with severe CDI, 58% tested positive by toxin EIA and 98% tested positive by NAAT. Increased CDI disease severity was not associated with an increased sensitivity of EIA (P = 0.31). These data demonstrate that toxin EIA performs poorly both for patients with severe CDI and for those with mild CDI and support the routine use of NAAT for the diagnosis of CDI. The presence of stool toxin measured by EIA does not correlate with disease severity.

Comparison of antigen and two molecular methods for the detection of Clostridium difficile toxins

BACKGROUND

Clostridium difficile (CD) is considered an important cause of diarrhoea associated with the antimicrobial treatment of infections. The pathogenicity of CD is due to toxins A and B, produced by toxigenic CD strains.

METHODS

We evaluated 3 methods for detecting CD toxins: the RIDASCREEN® enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (R-Biopharm)--one detecting toxins directly in the stool specimens and another detecting toxins from isolated CD strains--and 2 molecular methods, the illumigene™ loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) assay (Meridian) and RIDA®GENE polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay (R-Biopharm), as direct identification methods from stool specimens. Toxigenic culture (TC) was used as the reference method.

RESULTS

Altogether 884 stool samples were analyzed, of which 253 (29%) were positive by TC. Six hundred and seventy-two specimens were tested by RIDASCREEN EIA, 430 were tested with the illumigene LAMP assay, and 212 were tested with the RIDA GENE PCR assay. CD toxin A and B antigen tests by EIA were very insensitive, both directly from stool specimens (2 series; 57-61%) and in isolated CD strains (53%); consequently the negative predictive value remained low (84-93% and 91%, respectively). Specificity, however, was very good at 98-100%. The 2 molecular methods detected CD toxin genes excellently and equally, resulting in sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values of 98%, 100%, 100%, and 98%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Both molecular assays were easy to use, rapid, sensitive, and specific for the detection of toxigenic CD strains.

Molecular techniques for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the usefulness of 2 rapid molecular diagnostic techniques, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), in Clostridium difficile infection (CDI).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of PCR and LAMP in diagnosis of CDI, including studies that used toxigenic culture or cytotoxicity assay as reference standard.

RESULTS

A search of PubMed and CinAHL medical databases yielded 25 PCR studies, including 11,801 samples that met inclusion criteria and 6 heterogeneous studies that evaluated LAMP. With toxigenic culture as a standard, pooled sensitivity was 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-0.94); specificity, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.94-0.95); and diagnostic odds ratio, 378 (95% CI, 260-547). With cytotoxicity as a standard, pooled sensitivity was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84-0.90); specificity, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.97-0.98); and diagnostic odds ratio, 370 (95% CI, 226-606).

CONCLUSION

Polymerase chain reaction is a highly accurate test for identifying CDI. Heterogeneity in LAMP studies did not allow meta-analysis; however, further research into this promising method is warranted.

Comparison of commercial molecular assays for toxigenic Clostridium difficile detection in stools: BD GeneOhm Cdiff, XPert C. difficile and illumigene C. difficile

Three commercial molecular assays were evaluated for toxigenic Clostridium difficile detection in stools. As compared to toxigenic culture, BD GeneOhm Cdiff (BD Diagnostics), XPert C. difficile (Cepheid) and illumigene C. difficile (Meridian Bioscience) demonstrated respectively a sensitivity of 95.5%, 97.8% and 86.7% and a specificity of 97.9%, 97.9% and 100%.

A new rapid method for Clostridium difficile DNA extraction and detection in stool: toward point-of-care diagnostic testing

We describe a new method for the rapid diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection, with stool sample preparation and DNA extraction by heat and physical disruption in a single-use lysis microreactor (LMR), followed by a rapid PCR amplification step. All steps can be accomplished in <20 minutes overall. Gel electrophoresis is currently used to detect the amplification product, pending real-time availability with an ultra-rapid thermocycler. Compared with the dual enzyme immunoassay (EIA) screening test (C. diff Quik Chek Complete; Techlab, Blacksburg, VA), the novel LMR/PCR assay showed complete concordance with all glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) results (GDH(+)/toxin(+), n = 48; GDH(-)/toxin(-), n = 81). All 69 stool samples with discordant EIA results (GDH(+)/toxin(-)) were tested by both the LMR/PCR assay and the loop-mediated isothermal amplification test (LAMP) (Illumigene C. difficile; Meridian Bioscience, Cincinnati, OH). In 64/69 EIA-discordant samples, LAMP and LMR/PCR results matched (both positive in 29 sample and both negative in 35 samples); in the remaining 5 samples, results were discrepant between the LAMP assay (all five negative) and the LMR/PCR assay (all 5 positive). Overall, LMR/PCR testing matched the current algorithm of EIA and/or LAMP reflex testing in 193/198 (97.5%) samples. The present proof-of-concept study suggests that the novel LMR/PCR technique described here may be developed as an inexpensive, rapid, and reliable point-of-care diagnostic test for C. difficile infection and other infectious diseases.

An overview of the diagnosis and management of Clostridium difficile infection

The diagnosis and treatment of Clostridium difficile infection are becoming increasingly complex with the introduction of novel diagnostic techniques and new pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatments. The integration of these new approaches with older, established methods is a challenge to individual clinicians and hospital systems. This article provides an overview of the current methods for the diagnosis and treatment of C difficile infection.

Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile: comparison of the cell culture neutralization, Xpert C. difficile, Xpert C. difficile/Epi, and Illumigene C. difficile assays

Clostridium difficile is the most important cause of nosocomial diarrhea. Several laboratory techniques are available to detect C. difficile toxins or the genes that encode them in fecal samples. We evaluated the Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi (Cepheid, CA) that detect the toxin B gene (tcdB) and tcdB, cdt, and a deletion in tcdC associated with the 027/NAP1/BI strain, respectively, by real-time PCR, and the Illumigene C. difficile (Meridian Bioscience, Inc.) that detects the toxin A gene (tcdA) by loop-mediated isothermal amplification in stool specimens. Toxigenic culture was used as the reference method for discrepant stool specimens. Two hundred prospective and fifty retrospective diarrheal stool specimens were tested simultaneously by the cell cytotoxin neutralization assay (CCNA) and the Xpert C. difficile, Xpert C. difficile/Epi, and Illumigene C. difficile assays. Of the 200 prospective stools tested, 10.5% (n = 23) were determined to be positive by CCNA, 17.5% (n = 35) were determined to be positive by Illumigene C. difficile, and 21.5% (n = 43) were determined to be positive by Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi. Of the 50 retrospective stools, previously determined to be positive by CCNA, 94% (n = 47) were determined to be positive by Illumigene C. difficile and 100% (n = 50) were determined to be positive by Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi. Of the 11 discrepant results (i.e., negative by Illumigene C. difficile but positive by Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi), all were determined to be positive by the toxigenic culture. A total of 21% of the isolates were presumptively identified by the Xpert C. difficile/Epi as the 027/NAP1/BI strain. The Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi assays were the most sensitive, rapid, and easy-to use assays for the detection of toxigenic C. difficile in stool specimens.

Clostridium difficile testing algorithms using glutamate dehydrogenase antigen and C. difficile toxin enzyme immunoassays with C. difficile nucleic acid amplification testing increase diagnostic yield in a tertiary pediatric population

We evaluated the performance of the rapid C. diff Quik Chek Complete's glutamate dehydrogenase antigen (GDH) and toxin A/B (CDT) tests in two algorithmic approaches for a tertiary pediatric population: algorithm 1 entailed initial testing with GDH/CDT followed by loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP), and algorithm 2 entailed GDH/CDT followed by cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) for adjudication of discrepant GDH-positive/CDT-negative results. A true positive (TP) was defined as positivity by CCNA or positivity by LAMP plus another test (GDH, CDT, or the Premier C. difficile toxin A and B enzyme immunoassay [P-EIA]). A total of 141 specimens from 141 patients yielded 27 TPs and 19% prevalence. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 56%, 100%, 100%, and 90% for P-EIA and 81%, 100%, 100%, and 96% for both algorithm 1 and algorithm 2. In summary, GDH-based algorithms detected C. difficile infections with superior sensitivity compared to P-EIA. The algorithms allowed immediate reporting of half of all TPs, but LAMP or CCNA was required to confirm the presence or absence of toxigenic C. difficile in GDH-positive/CDT-negative specimens.

Biology of Clostridium difficile: implications for epidemiology and diagnosis

Clostridium difficile is an anaerobic, spore-forming, gram-positive rod that causes a spectrum of antibiotic-associated colitis through the elaboration of two large clostridial toxins and other virulence factors. Since its discovery in 1978 as the agent responsible for pseudomembranous colitis, the organism has continued to evolve into an adaptable, aggressive, hypervirulent strain. Advances in molecular methods and improved animal models have facilitated an understanding of how this organism survives in the environment, adapts to the gastrointestinal tract of animals and humans, and accomplishes its unique pathogenesis. The advances in microbiology have been accompanied by some important clinical observations including increased rates of C. difficile infection, increased virulence, and multiple outbreaks. The major new risk is fluoroquinolone use; there is also an association with proton pump inhibitors and increased recognition of cases in outpatients, pediatric patients, and patients without recent antibiotic use. The combination of more aggressive strains with mobile genomes in a setting of an expanded pool of individuals at risk has refocused attention on and challenged assumptions regarding diagnostic gold standards. Future research is likely to build upon the advancements in phylogenetics to create novel strategies for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention.

Pathology consultation on detection of Clostridium difficile

Laboratory methods for detecting Clostridium difficile have undergone considerable evolution since the organism's etiologic association with antibiotic-associated diarrhea and colitis was established. Clearly, familiarity with the advantages and shortcomings of the various assays is essential for the laboratory director when choosing among these tests. For the consulting pathologist, furthermore, an understanding of the laboratory's role in securing a diagnosis of C difficile infection (CDI) is also required to identify requests for unnecessary testing that may be costly and potentially misleading. The purpose of this article is to highlight the major differences in laboratory test methods for CDI and to review a few commonly encountered provider ordering scenarios.