» Articles » PMID: 19864479

Comparison of BD GeneOhm Cdiff Real-time PCR Assay with a Two-step Algorithm and a Toxin A/B Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay for Diagnosis of Toxigenic Clostridium Difficile Infection

Overview
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2009 Oct 30
PMID 19864479
Citations 51
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay, a real-time PCR assay for the detection of the Clostridium difficile toxin B (tcdB) gene, was compared with the toxin A/B (Tox A/B) II enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and a two-step algorithm which includes a C. Diff Chek-60 glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen assay followed by cytotoxin neutralization. Four hundred liquid or semisolid stool samples submitted for diagnostic C. difficile testing, 200 GDH antigen positive and 200 GDH antigen negative, were selected for analysis. All samples were tested by the C. Diff Chek-60 GDH antigen and cytotoxin neutralization assays, the Tox A/B II ELISA, and the BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay. Specimens with discrepant results were tested by toxigenic culture as an independent "gold standard." Of 200 GDH-positive samples, 71 were positive by the Tox A/B II ELISA, 88 were positive by the two-step method, 93 were positive by PCR, and 96 were positive by the GDH antigen assay only. Of 200 GDH-negative samples, 3 were positive by PCR only. Toxigenic culture was performed for 41 samples with discrepant results, and 39 were culture positive. Culture resolution of discrepant results showed the Tox A/B II assay to have detected 70 (66.7%), the two-step method to have detected 87 (82.9%), and PCR to have detected 96 (91.4%) of 105 true positives. The BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay was more sensitive in detecting toxigenic C. difficile than the Tox A/B II assay (P < 0.0001); however, the difference between PCR and the two-step method was not significant (P = 0.1237). Enhanced sensitivity and rapid turnaround time make the BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay an important advance in the diagnosis of toxigenic C. difficile infection.

Citing Articles

Comparison of the STANDARD M10 . , Xpert . , and BD MAX Cdiff assays as confirmatory tests in a two-step algorithm for diagnosing infection.

Choi H, Kang M, Yun S, Yu H, Suh E, Kim T Microbiol Spectr. 2024; 13(1):e0166224.

PMID: 39611822 PMC: 11705936. DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.01662-24.


Comparison of nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) results using fresh and frozen stool specimens and rectal swabs.

Dumm R, Burnham C, Hink T, Reske K, Struttmann E, Iqbal Z J Clin Microbiol. 2023; 62(1):e0103723.

PMID: 38078766 PMC: 10793323. DOI: 10.1128/jcm.01037-23.


Overview of current detection methods and microRNA potential in infection screening.

Bocchetti M, Ferraro M, Melisi F, Grisolia P, Scrima M, Cossu A World J Gastroenterol. 2023; 29(22):3385-3399.

PMID: 37389232 PMC: 10303512. DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v29.i22.3385.


Comparative Evaluation of Three Immunoassays for the Simultaneous Detection of Glutamate Dehydrogenase and Toxin A/B.

Kim N, Lee S, Park J, Lee J Microorganisms. 2022; 10(5).

PMID: 35630390 PMC: 9145049. DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms10050947.


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

Nana T, Moore C, Boyles T, Brink A, Cleghorn J, Devenish L S Afr J Infect Dis. 2021; 35(1):219.

PMID: 34485483 PMC: 8378053. DOI: 10.4102/sajid.v35i1.219.


References
1.
Peterson L, Robicsek A . Does my patient have Clostridium difficile infection?. Ann Intern Med. 2009; 151(3):176-9. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-3-200908040-00005. View

2.
Alonso R, Munoz C, Gros S, Garcia de Viedma D, Pelaez T, Bouza E . Rapid detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile from stool samples by a nested PCR of toxin B gene. J Hosp Infect. 1999; 41(2):145-9. DOI: 10.1016/s0195-6701(99)90052-x. View

3.
Planche T, Aghaizu A, Holliman R, Riley P, Poloniecki J, Breathnach A . Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection by toxin detection kits: a systematic review. Lancet Infect Dis. 2008; 8(12):777-84. DOI: 10.1016/S1473-3099(08)70233-0. View

4.
Reller M, Lema C, Perl T, Cai M, Ross T, Speck K . Yield of stool culture with isolate toxin testing versus a two-step algorithm including stool toxin testing for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol. 2007; 45(11):3601-5. PMC: 2168505. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01305-07. View

5.
Gilligan P . Is a two-step glutamate dehyrogenase antigen-cytotoxicity neutralization assay algorithm superior to the premier toxin A and B enzyme immunoassay for laboratory detection of Clostridium difficile?. J Clin Microbiol. 2008; 46(4):1523-5. PMC: 2292912. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.02100-07. View