» Articles » PMID: 29367295

Validation of Active Surveillance Testing for Clostridium Difficile Colonization Using the Cobas Cdiff Test

Overview
Specialty Microbiology
Date 2018 Jan 26
PMID 29367295
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

infection (CDI) is not declining in the United States. Nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) are used as part of active surveillance testing programs to prevent health care-associated infection. The objective of this study was to validate the cobas Cdiff Test on the cobas 4800 System (cobas) within a four-hospital system using prospectively collected perirectal swabs from asymptomatic patients at admission and during monthly intensive care unit (ICU) screening in an infection control CDI reduction program. Performance of the cobas was compared to that of toxigenic culture. Each positive cobas sample and the next following negative patient swab were cultured. The study design gave 273 samples processed by both cobas (137 positive and 136 negative) and culture (one negative swab was not cultured). Discrepant analysis was performed using a second NAAT, the Xpert Epi test (Xpert). This strategy was compared to a medical record review for antibiotic receipt that would inhibit growth of in colonic stool. None of the cobas-negative samples were culture positive. The cobas positive predictive value was 75.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 66.9% to 82%) and positive percent agreement was 100% (95% CI, 96.0% to 100%). Overall agreement between cobas and direct toxigenic culture was 87.6% (95% CI, 83.1% to 91%). For the cobas-positive/culture-negative (discrepant) samples, 7 Xpert-positive samples were from patients receiving inhibitory antimicrobials; only 4 of 23 Xpert-negative samples received these agents ( = 0.00006). Our results support use of the cobas as a reliable assay for an active surveillance testing program to detect asymptomatic carriers of toxigenic .

Citing Articles

Reduced Clostridioides difficile infection in a pragmatic stepped-wedge initiative using admission surveillance to detect colonization.

Peterson L, OGrady S, Keegan M, Fisher A, Zelencik S, Kufner B PLoS One. 2020; 15(3):e0230475.

PMID: 32191763 PMC: 7082001. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230475.


Equivalent Performance of the Cobas Cdiff Test for Use on the Cobas Liat System and the Cobas 4800 System.

Garg S, Lu K, Duncan J, Peterson L, Liesenfeld O Eur J Microbiol Immunol (Bp). 2018; 7(4):310-318.

PMID: 29403660 PMC: 5793701. DOI: 10.1556/1886.2017.00034.

References
1.
Obermeier P, Muehlhans S, Hoppe C, Karsch K, Tief F, Seeber L . Enabling Precision Medicine With Digital Case Classification at the Point-of-Care. EBioMedicine. 2016; 4:191-6. PMC: 4776059. DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.01.008. View

2.
Terveer E, Crobach M, Sanders I, Vos M, Verduin C, Kuijper E . Detection of Clostridium difficile in Feces of Asymptomatic Patients Admitted to the Hospital. J Clin Microbiol. 2016; 55(2):403-411. PMC: 5277509. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01858-16. View

3.
Longtin Y, Paquet-Bolduc B, Gilca R, Garenc C, Fortin E, Longtin J . Effect of Detecting and Isolating Clostridium difficile Carriers at Hospital Admission on the Incidence of C difficile Infections: A Quasi-Experimental Controlled Study. JAMA Intern Med. 2016; 176(6):796-804. DOI: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.0177. View

4.
Peterson L, Young S, Davis Jr T, Wang Z, Duncan J, Noutsios C . Evaluation of the cobas Cdiff Test for Detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in Stool Samples. J Clin Microbiol. 2017; 55(12):3426-3436. PMC: 5703809. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01135-17. View

5.
Rogers D, Kundrapu S, Sunkesula V, Donskey C . Comparison of perirectal versus rectal swabs for detection of asymptomatic carriers of toxigenic Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol. 2013; 51(10):3421-2. PMC: 3811660. DOI: 10.1128/JCM.01418-13. View