RESUMEN
The best laboratory diagnostic approach to detect Clostridioides --#1;Clostridium--#3; difficile infection (CDI) is a subject of ongoing debate. With the aim of evaluating four laboratory diagnostic methods, 250 unformed stools from patients with suspected CDI submitted to nine medical center laboratories from November 2010 to December 2011, were studied using: (1) an immunochromatographic rapid assay test that combines the qualitative determination of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) plus toxins A and B (QAB), the CDIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE assay; (2) an enzyme immunoassay for qualitative determination of toxins A and B, the RIDASCREENTC. difficile Toxin A/B assay (RAB); (3) a PCR for the toxin B gene assay (PCR); and (4) the toxigenic culture (TC).C. difficile isolates from direct toxin negative stools by QAB, RAB and PCR were evaluated for toxigenicity by the same direct tests, in order to assess the contribution of the TC (QAB-TC, RAB-TC, PCR-TC). A combination of the cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCCNA) in stools, and the same assay on isolates from direct negative samples (CCCNA-TC) was considered the reference method (CCCNA/CCCNA-TC). Of the 250 stools tested, 107 (42.8%) were positive by CCCNA/CCCNA-TC. The GDH and PCR/PCR-TC assays were the most sensitive, 91.59% and 87.62%, respectively. The QAB, RAB, QAB/QAB-TC and RAB/RAB-TC had the highest specificities, ca. 95%. A negative GDH result would rule out CDI, however, its low positive likelihood ratio (PLR) of 3.97 indicates that a positive result should always be complemented with the detection of toxins. If the RAB, QAB, and PCR assays do not detect toxins from direct feces, the toxigenic culture should be performed. In view of our results, the most accurate and reliable methods to be applied in a clinical microbiology laboratory were the QAB/QAB-TC, and RAB/RAB-TC, with PLRs >10 and negative likelihood ratios <0.30.
El mejor procedimiento para realizar el diagnóstico de laboratorio de la infección causada por Clostridioides --#1;Clostridium--#3; difficile (ICD) es aún objeto de debate. Con el fin de evaluar cuatro métodos diagnósticos de laboratorio, se estudiaron 250 muestras de heces diarreicas provenientes de pacientes con sospecha de ICD remitidas a los laboratorios de nueve centros médicos entre noviembre de 2010 y diciembre de 2011. Dichas muestras se analizaron mediante los siguientes métodos:1) un ensayo rápido inmunocromatográfico que combina la detección cualitativa de la glutamato deshidrogenasa (GDH) y de las toxinas Ay B (QAB), CDIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE;2) un enzimoinmunoanálisis para la determinación cualitativa de las toxinas A/B, RIDASCREENTC. difficile Toxin A/B (RAB);3) un método molecular basado en PCR para la detección del gen que codifica la toxina B (PCR) y 4) el cultivo toxigénico (TC). Como método de referencia se utilizó la combinación del ensayo de citotoxicidad sobre cultivo de células con la neutralización de toxina mediante anticuerpo específico en los filtrados de las heces (CCCNA) y el mismo método en sobrenadantes de aislamientos de C. difficile (CCCNA-TC). La toxigenicidad de las cepas aisladas de muestras directas negativas con QAB, RAB y PCR se evaluó con los mismos métodos, con el propósito de detectar la contribución del TC (QAB-TC, RAB-TC, PCR-TC). De las 250 muestras estudiadas, 107 (42,8%) fueron positivas por CCCNA/CCCNA-TC. Los métodos GDH y PCR/PCR-TC fueron los más sensibles: 91,59 y 87,62%, respectivamente. Los métodos QAB, RAB, QAB/QAB-TC y RAB/RAB-TC mostraron las mayores especificidades, del 95%, aproximadamente. Un resultado negativo para GDH excluiría la ICD, pero su baja razón de verosimilitud positiva (PLR), que fue 3,97, indica que un resultado positivo debe complementarse con la detección de toxinas. Cuando no se detectan toxinas directas por RAB, QAB ni PCR, debería realizarse el TC. De acuerdo con nuestros resultados, los métodos más precisos y confiables para ser aplicados en un laboratorio de microbiología clínica son QAB/QAB-TC y RAB/RAB-TC, con una PLR> 10 y una razón de verosimilitud negativa < 0,30.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Toxinas Bacterianas , Reacción en Cadena de la Polimerasa , Clostridioides difficile , Técnicas para Inmunoenzimas , Proteínas Bacterianas , Toxinas Bacterianas/análisis , Clostridioides difficile/genética , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Enterotoxinas , HecesRESUMEN
The best laboratory diagnostic approach to detect Clostridioides [Clostridium] difficile infection (CDI) is a subject of ongoing debate. With the aim of evaluating four laboratory diagnostic methods, 250 unformed stools from patients with suspected CDI submitted to nine medical center laboratories from November 2010 to December 2011, were studied using: (1) an immunochromatographic rapid assay test that combines the qualitative determination of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) plus toxins A and B (QAB), the CDIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE assay; (2) an enzyme immunoassay for qualitative determination of toxins A and B, the RIDASCREEN™ C. difficile Toxin A/B assay (RAB); (3) a PCR for the toxin B gene assay (PCR); and (4) the toxigenic culture (TC). C. difficile isolates from direct toxin negative stools by QAB, RAB and PCR were evaluated for toxigenicity by the same direct tests, in order to assess the contribution of the TC (QAB-TC, RAB-TC, PCR-TC). A combination of the cell culture cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCCNA) in stools, and the same assay on isolates from direct negative samples (CCCNA-TC) was considered the reference method (CCCNA/CCCNA-TC). Of the 250 stools tested, 107 (42.8%) were positive by CCCNA/CCCNA-TC. The GDH and PCR/PCR-TC assays were the most sensitive, 91.59% and 87.62%, respectively. The QAB, RAB, QAB/QAB-TC and RAB/RAB-TC had the highest specificities, ca. 95%. A negative GDH result would rule out CDI, however, its low positive likelihood ratio (PLR) of 3.97 indicates that a positive result should always be complemented with the detection of toxins. If the RAB, QAB, and PCR assays do not detect toxins from direct feces, the toxigenic culture should be performed. In view of our results, the most accurate and reliable methods to be applied in a clinical microbiology laboratory were the QAB/QAB-TC, and RAB/RAB-TC, with PLRs >10 and negative likelihood ratios <0.30.