Discrepancies among three laboratory methods for Clostridium difficile detection and a proposal for their optimal use

Accuracy of diagnostic assays for the detection of Clostridioides difficile: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) has been identified as one of the main causes of nosocomial infection all across the world. Rapid diagnosis of CDI is difficult and poses a significant challenge to physicians worldwide. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate rapid tests' diagnostic accuracy against toxigenic culture as the reference standard for CDI.

METHOD

We searched the PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for the relevant records. The QUADAS-2 tool was used to assess the quality of the studies. Diagnostic accuracy measures [i.e., sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratios (PLR), negative likelihood ratios (NLR), and the area under the curve (AUC)] were pooled with a random-effects model. All statistical analyses were performed with Meta-DiSc (Version 1.4, Cochrane Colloquium, Barcelona, Spain) and RevMan (version 5.3; The Nordic Cochrane Centre, the Cochrane Collaboration, Copenhagen, Denmark).

RESULTS

We reviewed retrieved records and identified 63 studies that met the inclusion criteria. 26 were about enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (our main index test). The sensitivity of GDH and Tox A/B EIAs were 82% (95% CI: 79-84) and 75% (95% CI: 70-79), respectively. On the other hand, the specificity of GDH EIA was 91% (95% CI: 90-92) and the specificity of Tox A/B EIA was 95% (95% CI: 94-96). Among other index tests, BD Max with 92% has the most sensitivity and cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) has the most specificity (100%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis demonstrated that EIAs could be reliable methods for detecting CDI based on their sensitivity, specificity, time and cost-effectiveness, and simplicity in the procedure. Further work to improve rapid tests would benefit from improvements to the methodology.

Clostridioides difficile in Latin America: A comprehensive review of literature (1984-2021)

This narrative review summarizes literature on C. difficile and C. difficile infections (CDI) that emerged from Latin America (LA) between 1984 and 2021. The revised information includes papers in English, Spanish, or Portuguese that were retrieved from the databases Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Scielo, and Lilacs. Information is presented chronologically and segregated in subregions, focusing on clinical presentation, risk factors, detection and typing methods, prevalence and incidence rates, circulating strains, and, when available, phenotypic traits, such as antimicrobial susceptibility patterns. Studies dealing with cases, clinical aspects of CDI, and performance evaluations of diagnostic methods predominated. However, they showed substantial differences in case definitions, measuring units, populations, and experimental designs. Although a handful of autochthonous strains were identified, predominantly in Brazil and Costa Rica, the presentation and epidemiology of CDI in LA were highly comparable to what has been reported in other regions of the world. Few laboratories isolate and type this bacterium and even less generate whole genome sequences or perform basic science on C. difficile. Less than ten countries lead academic productivity on C. difficile or CDI-related topics, and information from various countries in Central America and the Caribbean is still lacking. The review ends with a global interpretation of the data and recommendations to further develop and consolidate this discipline in LA.