Outcomes in patients tested for Clostridium difficile toxins

Evaluation of a two step testing algorithm to improve diagnostic accuracy and stewardship of Clostridioides difficile infections

In response to national guidelines, we implemented a two-step testing algorithm for Clostridioides difficile in an effort to improve diagnostic accuracy. Following implementation, we analyzed treatment frequency between discordant and concordant patients. We found that the majority of discordant cases were treated with no significant differences in patient characteristics or outcomes between the concordant and discordant groups. Additionally, there were no differences in outcomes when discordant patients were further stratified by treatment status. Given little added diagnostic accuracy with the addition of EIA toxin testing, our facility resumed diagnosis by PCR testing alone. Further studies are needed to investigate alternative processes for improvement in diagnostic accuracy aside from toxin EIA testing including stool submission criteria and educational programs.

Clostridioides difficile PCR Tcdb Cycle Threshold predicts toxin EIA positivity but not severity of infection

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile Infection (CDI) entails compatible clinical presentation and laboratory findings. We evaluated real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) cycle threshold (CT) as a predictor for disease severity and TcdB enzyme immunoassay (EIA) results.

METHODS

Inpatients or emergency department patients who tested positive for tcdB gene by PCR were evaluated. Patients' stools underwent testing for GDH and TcdA/B by EIA. Medical health records were reviewed for demographic, clinical presentation, laboratory, treatment and outcome data. Severity of CDI was calculated using various severity score indexes.

RESULTS

The median CT of cases was 32.05 ± 5.45. The optimal cut-off for predicting toxin EIA positivity and severe CDI based on chart review was 32.6 and 29.8, respectively, with the area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC) of 0.74 and 0.60 respectively.

CONCLUSION

CT value was an acceptable predictor for EIA toxin but less so for clinical severity. Our study potentially supports a diagnostic algorithm including CT value to reduce the number of EIA toxin assays performed.

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.

Binary Toxin Expression by Clostridioides difficile Is Associated With Worse Disease

BACKGROUND

The incidence of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) has increased over the past 2 decades and is considered an urgent threat by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Hypervirulent strains such as ribotype 027, which possess genes for the additional toxin C. difficile binary toxin (CDT), are contributing to increased morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

We retrospectively tested stool from 215 CDI patients for CDT by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Stratifying patients by CDT status, we assessed if disease severity and clinical outcomes correlated with CDT positivity. Additionally, we completed quantitative PCR (PCR) DNA extracted from patient stool to detect cdtB gene. Lastly, we performed 16 S rRNA gene sequencing to examine if CDT-positive samples had an altered fecal microbiota.

RESULTS

We found that patients with CdtB, the pore-forming component of CDT, detected in their stool by ELISA, were more likely to have severe disease with higher 90-day mortality. CDT-positive patients also had higher C. difficile bacterial burden and white blood cell counts. There was no significant difference in gut microbiome diversity between CDT-positive and -negative patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with fecal samples that were positive for CDT had increased disease severity and worse clinical outcomes. Utilization of PCR and testing for C. difficile toxins A and B may not reveal the entire picture when diagnosing CDI; detection of CDT-expressing strains is valuable in identifying patients at risk of more severe disease.

Ultrasensitive and quantitative toxin measurement correlates with baseline severity, severe outcomes, and recurrence among hospitalized patients with Clostridioides difficile infection

BACKGROUND

Stool toxin concentrations may impact Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) severity and outcomes. We correlated fecal C. difficile toxin concentrations, measured by an ultrasensitive and quantitative assay, with CDI baseline severity, attributable outcomes, and recurrence.

METHODS

We enrolled 615 hospitalized adults (≥ 18y) with CDI (acute diarrhea, positive stool NAAT, and decision to treat). Baseline stool toxin A and B concentrations were measured by Single Molecule Array. Subjects were classified by baseline CDI severity (four scoring methods) and outcomes within 40 days (death, ICU stay, colectomy, and recurrence).

RESULTS

Among 615 patients (median 68.0 years), in all scoring systems, subjects with severe baseline disease had higher stool toxin A+B concentrations than those without (P<0.01). Nineteen subjects (3.1%) had a severe outcome primarily-attributed to CDI (group 1). This group had higher median toxin A+B [14,303 pg/mL (IQR 416.0, 141,967)] than subjects in whom CDI only contributed to the outcome [group 2, 163.2 pg/mL(0.0, 8423.3)], subjects with severe outcome unrelated to CDI [group 3, 158.6 pg/mL (0.0, 1795.2)], or no severe outcome [group 4, 209.5 pg/mL (0.0, 8566.3)](P=0.003). Group 1 was more likely to have detectable toxin (94.7%) than groups 2-4 (60.5-66.1%)(P=0.02). Individuals with recurrence had higher toxin A+B [2266.8 pg/mL(188.8, 29411)] than those without [154.0 pg/mL(0.0, 5864.3)](P<0.001) and higher rates of detectable toxin (85.7% versus 64.0%, P=0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

In CDI patients, ultrasensitive stool toxin detection and concentration correlated with severe baseline disease, severe CDI-attributable outcomes, and recurrence, confirming the contribution of toxin quantity to disease presentation and clinical course.

Clinical Impact of Clostridium difficile PCR Cycle Threshold-Predicted Toxin Reporting in Pediatric Patients

BACKGROUND

Reliance on tests that detect only the presence of toxigenic Clostridium difficile can result in overdiagnosis and overtreatment of C difficile infection (CDI). The C difficile polymerase chain reaction (PCR) cycle threshold (CT) can sensitively predict the presence of free C difficile toxins; however, the clinical application for this testing strategy remains unexplored. We evaluated the impact of dual PCR and toxin result reporting, as predicted by the CT, on CDI management and outcomes in children.

METHODS

Before the intervention, results for C difficile testing at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford were reported as PCR positive (PCR+) or negative (PCR-) according to the GeneXpert C diff Epi tcdB PCR assay (Cepheid, Sunnyvale, California). Beginning October 5, 2016, the presence of free toxins, as predicted by the CT, was reported also. The CDI treatment rates 1 year before and 18 months after implementation of toxin reporting were compared. Demographic and treatment-related data were collected, and patient outcomes were followed up 8 weeks later.

RESULTS

CDI treatment decreased 22% after the intervention (96% [preintervention] vs 74% [postintervention]; P < .001). During the postintervention period, there were 152 PCR+C difficile results, and 94 (62%) of them were toxin positive (toxin+) according to the CT. Of the 58 PCR+/toxin-negative (toxin-) results, 38 (66%) did not result in CDI treatment. Seven (18%) of the untreated PCR+/toxin- patients underwent repeat testing within 8 weeks, and 5 (13%) of them were subsequently PCR+/toxin+ and treated. No CDI-related complications were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of the CT-predicted C difficile toxin result to PCR reporting reduces the proportion of PCR+ children treated for CDI.

2019 update of the WSES guidelines for management of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in surgical patients

In the last three decades, Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has increased in incidence and severity in many countries worldwide. The increase in CDI incidence has been particularly apparent among surgical patients. Therefore, prevention of CDI and optimization of management in the surgical patient are paramount. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of this infection.

A Multifaceted Approach to the Prevention of Clostridioides (Clostridium) Difficile

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this project was to design and implement a sustainable program to reduce hospital-acquired cases of Clostridioides difficile.

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT

Experiencing higher rates in a large, academic medical center, hospital leaders were assembled. The overall facility rate was 6.9% in 2014 with a first quarter rate of 8.4% in 2015. Individual unit rates were as high as 19.8%. A team of key stakeholders was assembled to plan, execute, and reevaluate targeted solutions. Strategies implemented were an innovative, automated screening tool, an evidence-based prevention bundle; and staff education.

OUTCOMES

A facility-wide C difficile prevention program was implemented with a sustained decrease in rates observed from 8.4% in the first quarter of 2015 to 6.0% in the fourth quarter of 2017. The standardized infection ratio ranged from 0.541 to 0.889, consistently below the national mean.

CONCLUSION

Clostridioides difficile is a leading cause of hospital-associated diarrhea and a tremendous burden on healthcare systems increasing morbidity, mortality, and financial strain. A multidisciplinary, multifaceted approach was critical to ensure early detection, reduce risk of transmission, and decrease overall rates.

2019 update of the WSES guidelines for management of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in surgical patients

In the last three decades, Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) has increased in incidence and severity in many countries worldwide. The increase in CDI incidence has been particularly apparent among surgical patients. Therefore, prevention of CDI and optimization of management in the surgical patient are paramount. An international multidisciplinary panel of experts from the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) updated its guidelines for management of CDI in surgical patients according to the most recent available literature. The update includes recent changes introduced in the management of this infection.

Clostridium difficile shows no trade-off between toxin and spore production within the human host

PURPOSE

This study aimed to describe the correlation between Clostridium difficile spore and toxin levels within the human host. In addition, we assessed whether overgrowth of Candida albicans modified this association.

METHODOLOGY

We measured toxin, spore and Candida albicans levels among 200 successively collected stool samples that tested positive for C. difficile, and PCR ribotyped these C. difficile isolates. Analysis of variance and linear regression were used to test the association between spore and toxin levels. Kruskal-Wallis tests and t-tests were used to compare the association between spore or toxin levels and host, specimen, or pathogen characteristics.

RESULTS

C. difficile toxin and spore levels were positively associated (P<0.001); this association did not vary significantly with C. albicans overgrowth [≥5 logs of C. albicans colony-forming units (c.f.u.) g^-1]. However, ribotypes 027 and 078-126 were significantly associated with higher levels of toxin and spores, and C. albicans overgrowth.

CONCLUSION

The strong positive association observed between in vivo levels of C. difficile toxin and spores suggests that patients with more severe C. difficile infections may have increased spore production, enhancing C. difficile transmission. Although, on average, spore levels were higher in toxin-positive samples than in toxin-negative/PCR-positive samples, spores were found in almost all toxin-negative samples. The ubiquity of spore production among toxin-negative and formed stool samples emphasizes the importance of following infection prevention and control measures for all C. difficile-positive patients during their entire hospital stay.

Advances in the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridium difficile infections

Clostridium difficile is a leading cause of antibiotic-associated diarrhea worldwide. The diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI) requires both clinical manifestations and a positive laboratory test for C. difficile and/or its toxins. While antibiotic therapy is the treatment of choice for CDI, there are relatively few classes of effective antibiotics currently available. Therefore, the development of novel antibiotics and/or alternative treatment strategies for CDI has received a great deal of attention in recent years. A number of emerging agents such as cadazolid, surotomycin, ridinilazole, and bezlotoxumab have demonstrated activity against C. difficile; some of these have been approved for limited clinical use and some are in clinical trials. In addition, other approaches such as early and accurate diagnosis of CDI as well as disease prevention are important for clinical management. While the toxigenic culture and the cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay are still recognized as the gold standard for the diagnosis of CDI, new diagnostic approaches such as nucleic acid amplification methods have become available. In this review, we will discuss both current and emerging diagnostic and therapeutic modalities for CDI.

Clinical and economic impact of the introduction of a nucleic acid amplification assay for Clostridium difficile

Background

The clinical outcomes and cost implications of a diagnostic shift from an EIA- to PCR-based assay for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) have not been completely described in the literature.

Methods

The impact of the PCR-based assay on the incidence and duration of CDI therapy was compared to the EIA assay for patients with a negative CDI diagnostic result. Secondary clinical and economic outcomes were also evaluated. Independent predictors of receipt of antibiotic therapy were assessed via logistic regression.

Results

141 EIA and 140 PCR patients were included. Significantly more patients were started or continued on anti-CDI antibiotic therapy after a known negative assay result in the EIA group (26 patients vs. 8 patients, P = 0.002). Duration of antibiotic therapy after a known negative result was significantly shorter in the PCR group (1 vs. 4 days, P = 0.029) and a 23% reduction in the number of tests obtained per patient was observed (1.41 ± 0.86 vs. 1.82 ± 1.35, P = 0.007). The over fourfold difference in per-test cost of the EIA assay ($8.33 vs. $42.86, P < 0.0001) was offset by the overall medication costs required for the increased treatment in the EIA group ($546.60 vs. $188.96, P = 0.191). Utilization of the EIA-based CDI assay was associated with increased odds of CDI treatment after a negative test (aOR 4.71, 95% CI 1.93–11.46, P = 0.001).

Conclusion

The transition from an EIA to PCR-based assay for diagnosing CDI resulted in a significant decrease in the number of patients treated and the duration of treatment in response to a negative test result. This significant decrease in treatment resulted in decreased costs offsetting the utilization of a more expensive molecular test for patients with a negative CDI diagnostic result.

Evaluation of Correlation between Pretest Probability for Clostridium difficile Infection and Clostridium difficile Enzyme Immunoassay Results

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of hospitalized patients tested for Clostridium difficile and determine the correlation between pretest probability for C. difficile infection (CDI) and assay results. Patients with testing ordered for C. difficile were enrolled and assigned a high, medium, or low pretest probability of CDI based on clinical evaluation, laboratory, and imaging results. Stool was tested for C. difficile by toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) and toxigenic culture (TC). Chi-square analyses and the log rank test were utilized. Among the 111 patients enrolled, stool samples from nine were TC positive and four were EIA positive. Sixty-one (55%) patients had clinically significant diarrhea, 19 (17%) patients did not, and clinically significant diarrhea could not be determined for 31 (28%) patients. Seventy-two (65%) patients were assessed as having a low pretest probability of having CDI, 34 (31%) as having a medium probability, and 5 (5%) as having a high probability. None of the patients with low pretest probabilities had a positive EIA, but four were TC positive. None of the seven patients with a positive TC but a negative index EIA developed CDI within 30 days after the index test or died within 90 days after the index toxin EIA date. Pretest probability for CDI should be considered prior to ordering C. difficile testing and must be taken into account when interpreting test results. CDI is a clinical diagnosis supported by laboratory data, and the detection of toxigenic C. difficile in stool does not necessarily confirm the diagnosis of CDI.

Variability in testing policies and impact on reported Clostridium difficile infection rates: results from the pilot Longitudinal European Clostridium difficile Infection Diagnosis surveillance study (LuCID)

Lack of standardised Clostridium difficile testing is a potential confounder when comparing infection rates. We used an observational, systematic, prospective large-scale sampling approach to investigate variability in C. difficile sampling to understand C. difficile infection (CDI) incidence rates. In-patient and institutional data were gathered from 60 European hospitals (across three countries). Testing methodology, testing/CDI rates and case profiles were compared between countries and institution types. The mean annual CDI rate per hospital was lowest in the UK and highest in Italy (1.5 vs. 4.7 cases/10,000 patient bed days [pbds], p < 0.001). The testing rate was highest in the UK compared with Italy and France (50.7/10,000 pbds vs. 31.5 and 30.3, respectively, p < 0.001). Only 58.4 % of diarrhoeal samples were tested for CDI across all countries. Overall, only 64 % of hospitals used recommended testing algorithms for laboratory testing. Small hospitals were significantly more likely to use standalone toxin tests (SATTs). There was an inverse correlation between hospital size and CDI testing rate. Hospitals using SATT or assays not detecting toxin reported significantly higher CDI rates than those using recommended methods, despite testing similar testing frequencies. These data are consistent with higher false-positive rates in such (non-recommended) testing scenarios. Cases in Italy and those diagnosed by SATT or methods NOT detecting toxin were significantly older. Testing occurred significantly earlier in the UK. Assessment of testing practice is paramount to the accurate interpretation and comparison of CDI rates.

Diagnosing Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea using enzyme immunoassay: the clinical significance of toxin negativity in glutamate dehydrogenase-positive patients

Purpose

The enzyme immunoassay (EIA) has lower sensitivity for Clostridium difficile toxins A and B than the polymerase chain reaction in the diagnosis of C. difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD). Furthermore, toxin positivity with EIA performed on C. difficile isolates from stool cultures may be observed even in patients with EIA glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH)-positive and toxin-negative stool specimens. It is unclear whether such patients should be treated as having CDAD.

Methods

The present study retrospectively compared patient characteristics, treatment, and diarrhea duration among three groups of patients who underwent stool EIA testing for CDAD diagnosis: a toxin-positive stool group (positive stool group; n=39); a toxin-negative stool/toxin-positive isolate group (discrepant negative/positive group, n=14); and a dual toxin-negative stool and isolate group (dual negative group, n=15). All cases included were confirmed to be GDH positive on EIA test.

Results

Patients’ backgrounds and comorbidities were not significantly different among three groups. No difference was observed among the three groups with regard to antimicrobial drug use before diarrhea onset. Treatment was received by 82.1% of the positive stool group compared to 7.1% of the discrepant positive/negative group and 0% of the dual negative group, while mean diarrhea duration was 10.6 days compared to 7.9 days (P=0.6006) and 3.4 days (P=0.0312), respectively.

Conclusion

Even without treatment, patients with toxin-negative stool specimens had shorter diarrhea duration than those with toxin-positive stool specimens even with toxin-positive isolates. These findings may suggest a limited need for CDAD treatment for GDH-positive patients and toxin-negative stool specimens.

Ultrasensitive Detection and Quantification of Toxins for Optimized Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection

Recently developed ultrasensitive and quantitative methods for detection of Clostridium difficile toxins provide new tools for diagnosis and, potentially, for management of C. difficile infection (CDI). Compared to methods that detect toxigenic organism, ultrasensitive toxin detection may allow diagnosis of CDI with increased clinical specificity, without sacrificing clinical sensitivity; measurement of toxin levels may also provide information relevant to disease prognosis. This minireview provides an overview of these new toxin detection technologies and considers what these new tools might add to the field.

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.

Low sensitivity of fecal toxin A/B enzyme immunoassay for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection in immunocompromised patients

The optimal approach in laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is still not well defined. Toxigenic culture (TC) or alternatively fecal toxin assay by cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay are considered to be the reference standard, but these methods are time-consuming and labor intensive. In many medical centers, diagnosis of CDI is therefore still based on fecal toxin A/B enzyme immunoassay (EIA) directly from stool alone, balancing cost and speed against limited diagnostic sensitivity. The aim of the study was to assess in which patient population the additional workload of TC is justified. All consecutive stool specimens submitted for diagnosis of suspected CDI between 2004 and 2011 at a tertiary-care center were examined by toxin EIA and TC. Clinical data of patients with established diagnosis of CDI were collected in a standardized case-report form. From 12,481 stool specimens submitted to the microbiologic laboratory, 480 (3.8%) fulfilled CDI criteria; 274 (57.1%) were diagnosed by toxin EIA; and an additional 206 (42.9%) were diagnosed by TC when toxin EIA was negative. Independent predictors for negative toxin EIA but positive TC were high-dose corticosteroids (odds ratio (OR) 2.97, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.50-5.90, p 0.002), leukocytopenia <1000/μL (OR 2.52, 95% CI 1.22-5.23, p 0.013) and nonsevere CDI (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.39-3.50, p 0.001). There was no difference in outcomes such as in-hospital mortality and recurrence between both groups. In conclusion, negative toxin EIA does not rule out CDI in immunocompromised patients in the setting of relevant clinical symptoms. Methods with improved sensitivity such as TC or PCR should be used, particularly in this patient population.

Development and Validation of Digital Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays for Ultrasensitive Detection and Quantification of Clostridium difficile Toxins in Stool

The currently available diagnostics for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) have major limitations. Despite mounting evidence that toxin detection is paramount for diagnosis, conventional toxin immunoassays are insufficiently sensitive and cytotoxicity assays too complex; assays that detect toxigenic organisms (toxigenic culture [TC] and nucleic acid amplification testing [NAAT]) are confounded by asymptomatic colonization by toxigenic C. difficile. We developed ultrasensitive digital enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs) for toxins A and B using single-molecule array technology and validated the assays using (i) culture filtrates from a panel of clinical C. difficile isolates and (ii) 149 adult stool specimens already tested routinely by NAAT. The digital ELISAs detected toxins A and B in stool with limits of detection of 0.45 and 1.5 pg/ml, respectively, quantified toxins across a 4-log range, and detected toxins from all clinical strains studied. Using specimens that were negative by cytotoxicity assay/TC/NAAT, clinical cutoffs were set at 29.4 pg/ml (toxin A) and 23.3 pg/ml (toxin B); the resulting clinical specificities were 96% and 98%, respectively. The toxin B digital ELISA was 100% sensitive versus cytotoxicity assay. Twenty-five percent and 22% of the samples positive by NAAT and TC, respectively, were negative by the toxin B digital ELISA, consistent with the presence of organism but minimal or no toxin. The mean toxin levels by digital ELISA were 1.5- to 1.7-fold higher in five patients with CDI-attributable severe outcomes, versus 68 patients without, but this difference was not statistically significant. Ultrasensitive digital ELISAs for the detection and quantification of toxins A and B in stool can provide a rapid and simple tool for the diagnosis of CDI with both high analytical sensitivity and high clinical specificity.

Clostridium difficile in Crete, Greece: epidemiology, microbiology and clinical disease

We studied the epidemiology and microbiology of Clostridium difficile and the characteristics of patients with C. difficile infection (CDI) in Crete in three groups of hospitalized patients with diarrhoea: group 1 [positive culture and positive toxin by enzyme immunoassay (EIA)]; group 2 (positive culture, negative toxin); group 3 (negative culture, negative toxin). Patients in group 1 were designated as those with definitive CDI (20 patients for whom data was available) and matched with cases in group 2 (40 patients) and group 3 (40 patients). C. difficile grew from 6% (263/4379) of stool specimens; 14·4% of these had positive EIA, of which 3% were resistant to metronidazole. Three isolates had decreased vancomycin susceptibility. Patients in groups 1 and 2 received more antibiotics (P = 0·03) and had more infectious episodes (P = 0·03) than patients in group 3 prior to diarrhoea. Antibiotic administration for C. difficile did not differ between groups 1 and 2. Mortality was similar in all three groups (10%, 12·5% and 5%, P = 0·49). CDI frequency was low in the University Hospital of Crete and isolates were susceptible to metronidazole and vancomycin.

Strategies to prevent Clostridium difficile infections in acute care hospitals: 2014 update

Previously published guidelines are available that provide comprehensive recommendations for detecting and preventing healthcare-associated infections (HAIs). The intent of this document is to highlight practical recommendations in a concise format designed to assist acute care hospitals in implementing and prioritizing their Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) prevention efforts. This document updates “Strategies to Prevent Clostridium difficile Infections in Acute Care Hospitals,” published in 2008. This expert guidance document is sponsored by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and is the product of a collaborative effort led by SHEA, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the American Hospital Association (AHA), the Association for Professionals in Infection Control and Epidemiology (APIC), and The Joint Commission, with major contributions from representatives of a number of organizations and societies with content expertise. The list of endorsing and supporting organizations is presented in the introduction to the 2014 updates.

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.

Prevalence of clostridium difficile among paediatric patients in a tertiary care hospital, coastal karnataka, South India

INTRODUCTION

The study was intended to analyse the burden of Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) and associated intestinal pathogens from children with diarrhoea who were hospitalized in a tertiary care teaching hospital of South India.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Stool samples from 138 children with diarrhoea belonging to the age group 0-14 years were analysed by semi quantitative culture, latex agglutination and enzyme immunoassay for C. difficile. The associated intestinal pathogens were also detected from the specimens by standard procedures.

RESULTS

Stool samples of 138 children were tested during the period; 21 (15.22%) samples were culture positive for C. difficile and the isolates were confirmed by biochemical reactions. 9(6.52%) were positive by latex agglutination. EIA for C. difficile toxins A and B was done on all the stool specimens and 15 were found to be positive (10.87 %). According to the reference standard method employed in our study, 4 toxigenic C. difficile isolates (2.90%) were obtained from 138 specimens. Among the other intestinal pathogens, Escherichia coli predominated (22.46%). Rota virus was detected in 7.27% stool samples of children under the age of five years.

CONCLUSION

The study shows the prevalence of C. difficile in hospitalized children in our locality which highlights the importance of judicious use of antibiotics and strict infection control measures.

Clinical characteristics and outcome of patients with Clostridium difficile infection diagnosed by PCR versus a three-step algorithm

Clinical features of Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) detected by PCR, but not by conventional methods, are poorly understood. We compared the clinical features of CDI cases detected by PCR only and cases detected by both PCR and a three-step algorithm. We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients fulfilling a standardized definition over a 13-month period. Stool specimens were tested in parallel by PCR and an algorithm based on enzyme immunoassay and cytotoxicity assay (EIA/CCA). Clinical features of CDI cases detected by PCR only and cases detected by PCR and EIA/CCA were compared by univariate logistic regression. In all, 97 patients (31 PCR+ and 66 PCR+EIA/CCA+) met the inclusion criteria. Compared with cases detected by both PCR and EIA/CCA, CDI cases detected by PCR only were younger (65.4 versus 76.3 years; p 0.001), had a lower absolute neutrophil count (mean, 9.4 × 10(9) /L versus 12.5 × 10(9) /L; p 0.04), were less likely to receive oral vancomycin (2/31 versus 25/66; p 0.005) or combination therapy (0/31 versus 16/66; p 0.04), and had fewer complications (6/31 versus 29/66; p 0.02), despite presenting a higher number of bowel movements on the day of diagnosis (median, 6.0 versus 3.0; p 0.02). They had also a lower C. difficile faecal bacterial load (mean, 5.04 versus 6.89 log10 CFU/g; p <0.001). The CDI cases detected by PCR only and cases detected by both PCR and EIA/CCA have different clinical features, but whether these two populations can be managed differently remains to be determined.

Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: the molecular approach

Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection is based on clinical presentation and laboratory tests. Although numerous laboratory methods are now available, the diagnosis of C. difficile infection remains challenging. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAATs) are the most recent marketed methods. These methods detect genes for toxins A and/or B. They are very sensitive compared with the reference method (toxigenic culture) and are thus very promising, despite their cost. However, a positive NAAT result must be interpreted with caution owing to the possible detection of asymptomatic carriers of toxigenic strains who may have diarrhea for other reasons. The place of NAATs in current diagnostic strategies needs to be better defined, but the rapidity of the result is interesting for early recognition of the disease.

Ribotype 027 Clostridium difficile infections with measurable stool toxin have increased lactoferrin and are associated with a higher mortality

We evaluated clinical and diagnostic indicators of severe C. difficile infection (CDI) and their association with poor clinical outcome. A total of 210 patients positive according to PCR (toxin B: tcdB) were included, with patients having a median age of 62 years and a Charlson co-morbidity index (CI) score of 5. Ninety-one percent (n = 191) were positive by toxigenic culture and 61 % (n = 129) had stool toxin. Toxin-positive patients had significantly higher fecal lactoferrin (mean 316 μg/g versus 106 μg/g stool; p < 0.0001). Forty percent of patients (n = 85) were infected with ribotype 027 and significantly more of these patients had measurable stool toxin (79 % vs. 50 %; p < 0.0001). The mean fecal lactoferrin was significantly higher for toxin-positive 027 CDI compared with the 027 toxin-negative group (317 vs 60 μg/g; p = 0.0014). Ribotype 027 CDI with stool toxin showed a higher all-cause, 100-day mortality compared with non-027 with stool toxin (36 % vs 18 %; p = 0.017). Logistic regression univariate analysis for odds ratio (OR) and p values revealed that age (OR = 1.1), intensive care unit treatment (OR = 2.7), CI (OR = 1.2), 027 CDI (OR = 2.1), white blood cell count (OR = 1.0), albumin level (OR = 0.1), and stool toxin-positive 027 CDI (OR = 2.5) were significantly associated with 100-day mortality (p < 0.05). In conclusion, CDI PCR-positive patients with 027 infection and stool toxin have increased lactoferrin and are at an increased risk of death.

Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: an ongoing conundrum for clinicians and for clinical laboratories. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2013;26:604-630. [PMID: 23824374 DOI: 10.1128/cmr.00016-13]

Clostridium difficile is a formidable nosocomial and community-acquired pathogen, causing clinical presentations ranging from asymptomatic colonization to self-limiting diarrhea to toxic megacolon and fulminant colitis. Since the early 2000s, the incidence of C. difficile disease has increased dramatically, and this is thought to be due to the emergence of new strain types. For many years, the mainstay of C. difficile disease diagnosis was enzyme immunoassays for detection of the C. difficile toxin(s), although it is now generally accepted that these assays lack sensitivity. A number of molecular assays are commercially available for the detection of C. difficile. This review covers the history and biology of C. difficile and provides an in-depth discussion of the laboratory methods used for the diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI). In addition, strain typing methods for C. difficile and the evolving epidemiology of colonization and infection with this organism are discussed. Finally, considerations for diagnosing C. difficile disease in special patient populations, such as children, oncology patients, transplant patients, and patients with inflammatory bowel disease, are described. As detection of C. difficile in clinical specimens does not always equate with disease, the diagnosis of C. difficile infection continues to be a challenge for both laboratories and clinicians.

Clinical relevance of a positive molecular test in the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection

BACKGROUND

In 2011, the Department of Health advised that a two-stage test approach should be used to improve accuracy of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) diagnosis. No specific test protocol was established at that time.

AIM

To compare clinical features of inpatient CDI cases identified by toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) with those identified as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive but toxin EIA negative.

METHODS

During a six-month period (2011-2012), 2181 liquid faeces samples submitted to North Bristol NHS Trust were tested by EIA for both toxin and glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH). A total of 215 toxin or GDH EIA-positive samples were tested by Cepheid Xpert PCR assay; 128 clinically evaluable inpatients were grouped by test result, and their duration of diarrhoea and 14-day mortality compared.

FINDINGS

Inpatients with a positive PCR but negative toxin EIA had a significantly lower 14-day all-cause mortality [11%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4-23%] than patients with a positive PCR and positive toxin EIA test (37%; 95% CI: 19-59%; P = 0.01), and a smaller proportion of patients had prolonged diarrhoea (>5 days or unresolved at death: 19%; CI: 9-32%, vs 67%; CI: 45-84%; P < 0.001). A positive toxin EIA test was a significant independent predictor of death [odds ratio (OR): 4.7, 95% CI: 1.4-15.4; P = 0.01] and prolonged diarrhoea (OR: 8.6; CI: 2.9-25.6; P < 0.001), but a positive PCR (given positive GDH EIA) was not.

CONCLUSION

The clinical significance of a positive PCR result without a positive toxin EIA is questionable; such a result is associated with a significantly lower mortality and shorter duration of symptoms than patients with a positive toxin EIA.

Quantitative fecal lactoferrin in toxin-positive and toxin-negative Clostridium difficile specimens

Quantitative fecal lactoferrin was measured in 112 patients tested for toxigenic Clostridium difficile using glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin immunoassays combined with tcdB PCR. Lactoferrin levels were higher in the GDH-positive/toxin-positive group (79 μg/ml) than in the GDH-positive/toxin-negative/PCR-positive (21 μg/ml) and the GDH-negative groups (13 μg/ml). Differences in fecal lactoferrin levels suggest variable presence or severity of C. difficile infection among toxin-positive and toxin-negative patients.