Implementing a Clostridium difficile testing algorithm and its effect on isolation duration and treatment initiation: a pre- and post-implementation study

A Simple Prediction Model for Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Hospital-Based Administrative Database Study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Few prediction scores for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), a potentially life-threatening nosocomial diarrhea, combine high accuracy with simplicity. A simple prediction score for routine clinical practice is needed.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all inpatients aged ≥ 18 at a secondary care hospital in Japan. The derivation and validation cohorts consisted of patients from January 2016 to December 2020 and January 2021 to September 2022, respectively. Demographic and clinical data were retrieved using electronic medical records and an administrative database. The primary outcome was to derive and validate an accurate, simple prediction score for primary hospital-onset CDI. A derived prediction score by logistic regression analysis was calibrated and validated.

RESULTS

CDI developed in 102 of 25 517 and 25 of 6259 patients in the derived and validation cohorts (2.7 cases/10 000 patient-days). The derived model for predicting CDI, including antibiotic use, acid suppressant (proton pump inhibitors or vonoprazan) use, Charlson comorbidity index, and Barthel index, yielded c-statistics of 0.89 and 0.82 in the derivation and validation cohort. The model was well calibrated.

CONCLUSIONS

This simple prediction score enables early medical intervention and modification of treatment plans to reduce the risk of developing primary hospital-onset CDI.

Clinical significance of toxin EIA positivity in patients with suspected Clostridioides difficile infection: systematic review and meta-analysis

The laboratory diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is controversial. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) and toxin enzyme immunoassays (EIA) are most widely used, often in combination. However, the interpretation of a positive NAAT and negative toxin immunoassay (NAAT+/EIA-) is uncertain. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies reporting clinical outcomes in NAAT+/EIA- versus NAAT+/EIA+ patients. Forty-six studies comprising 33,959 patients were included in this meta-analysis. All-cause mortality (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.80-1.15), attributable mortality (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.20-1.91), fulminant CDI (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.57-1.20), radiographic evidence of CDI (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.16), total CDI complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59-1.53), colectomies (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.34-1.79), and ICU admission (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.84-1.30) did not significantly differ between NAAT+/EIA- and NAAT+/EIA+ patients. However, rates of recurrent (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.50-0.77) or severe (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.88) CDI were significantly lower in NAAT+/EIA- patients than in NAAT+/EIA+ patients. The pooled prevalence of NAAT+/EIA- patients who were treated with antibiotics for CDI was 73.4% (pooled proportion 0.72, 95% CI 0.52-0.88). NAAT+/EIA- patients have lower rates of recurrence and are at reduced risk for severe CDI compared with NAAT+/EIA+ patients but have a risk of CDI-related complications and mortality comparable to that of NAAT+/EIA+ patients. Toxin results cannot rule in or rule out CDI, and the decision whether to treat symptomatic NAAT+/EIA- patients for CDI should be based on clinical presentation and not on the toxin result.IMPORTANCEClostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a common cause of healthcare-associated infections and the leading cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhea. However, the laboratory diagnosis of CDI, primarily done by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) and enzyme immunoassay (EIA), is controversial, especially in patients who test positive by NAAT but negative by EIA. In this systematic review, we compared the clinical outcomes of NAAT+/EIA- versus NAAT+/EIA+ patients and found that the two groups have similar risk of mortality and CDI-related complications. However, NAAT+/EIA- patients had significantly lower rates of recurrence and severe CDI than NAAT+/EIA+ patients, and most NAAT+/EIA- patients received CDI therapy. Toxin testing can help to predict the likelihood of CDI recurrence or severe infection, but the toxin result should not be a determining factor in the administration of CDI therapy. The decision on whether to treat NAAT+/EIA- patients should be based on clinical assessment.

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.

Clostridioides difficile Near-Patient Testing Versus Centralized Testing: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Crossover Trial

BACKGROUND

Management of suspected Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in the hospital setting typically results in patient isolation, laboratory testing, infection control, and presumptive treatment. We investigated whether implementation of rapid near-patient testing (NPT) reduced patient isolation time, hospital length of stay (LOS), antibiotic usage, and cost.

METHODS

A 2-period pragmatic cluster randomized crossover trial was conducted. Thirty-nine wards were randomized into 2 study arms. The primary outcome measure was effect of NPT on patient isolation time using a mixed-effects generalized linear regression model. Secondary outcomes examined were hospital LOS and antibiotic therapy based on a negative binomial regression model. Natural experiment (NE), intention-to-treat (ITT), and per-protocol (PP) analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

During the entire study period, a total of 656 patients received NPT for CDI and 1667 received standard-of-care testing. For the primary outcome, a significant decrease of patient isolation time with NPT was observed (NE, 9.4 hours [P < .01]; ITT, 2.3 hours [P < .05]; PP, 6.7 hours [P < .1]). A significant reduction in hospital LOS was observed with NPT for short stay (NE, 47.4% [P < .01]; ITT, 18.4% [P < .01]; PP, 34.2% [P < .01]). Each additional hour delay for a negative result increased metronidazole use (24 defined daily doses per 1000 patients; P < .05) and non-CDI-treating antibiotics by 70.13 mg (P < .01). NPT was found to save 25.48 US dollars per patient when including test cost to the laboratory and patient isolation in the hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

This pragmatic cluster randomized crossover trial demonstrated that implementation of CDI NPT can contribute to significant reductions in isolation time, hospital LOS, antibiotic usage, and healthcare cost. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03857464.

Association between Clostridioides difficile infection testing results and decision to treat

We sought to determine how often patients with a negative toxin enzyme immunoassay following a positive nucleic acid amplification test for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) were treated for CDI in Veterans Affairs facilities. From October 2018 through March 2021, 702 (29.5%) of 2,374 unique patients with these test results were treated.

Recent advances in the treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection: the ever-changing guidelines

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), formerly known as Clostridium difficile, continues to be the most common healthcare-associated infection worldwide. With the shifting epidemiology towards higher a incidence of community-acquired CDI and the continued burden on the healthcare system posed by high rates of CDI recurrence, there has been an impetus to advance the diagnostic testing and treatment strategies. Recent advancements over the past decade have led to rapidly changing guidelines issued by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. With our comprehensive review, we aim to summarize the latest advances in diagnosing and treating CDI and thus attempt to help readers guide best practices for patient care. This article also focusses on cost-effectiveness of various therapies currently available on the market and provides an analysis of the current evidence on a relatively new monoclonal antibody therapy, Bezlotoxumab, to treat recurrent CDI.