1887

Chapter 4.15 : as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis

Author: Gerri S. Hall
Content Type: Reference
Publication Year: 2016

Category: Clinical Microbiology

MyBook is a cheap paperback edition of the original book and will be sold at uniform, low price.

Preview this chapter:
Preview Magnify
Zoom in
Zoomout

as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis, Page 1 of 2

| /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555818814/9781555818814_Chap4.15-1.gif /docserver/preview/fulltext/10.1128/9781555818814/9781555818814_Chap4.15-2.gif

Abstract:

is the major cause of nosocomial diarrhea and the primary pathogen responsible for pseudomembranous colitis. In the United States, there are >300,000 cases per year of antimicrobial agent-associated diarrhea, colitis, or pseudomembranous colitis caused by this organism and its toxins. In a recent review article, one hospital reported that medical expenditures associated with -associated disease were almost $1,000,000 per year and a another review article suggested that that health care costs in the United States were approaching $1 billion annually ( ). can also be a rare cause of abscesses, wound infections, osteomyelitis, pleuritis, peritonitis, septicemia, and urogenital tract infections; for isolation and identification of in these extraintestinal sites, see procedure 4.12, which covers anaerobic Gram-positive bacilli.

Citation: Hall G. 2016. as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis, p 4.15.1-4.15.7. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.15
Highlighted Text: Show | Hide
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

/content/book/10.1128/9781555818814.chap4.15
1. Song X, Bartlett JG, Speck K, Naegeli A, Carroll KC, Perl TM. 2008. Rising economic impact of Clostridium difficile-associated disease in adult hospitalized patient population. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 29: 823– 828.
2. Voth DE, Ballard JD. 2005. Clostridium difficile toxins: mechanism of action and role of disease. Clin Microbiol Rev 18: 247– 263.
3. Bartlett JG. 1997. Clostridium difficile infection: pathophysiology and diagnosis. Semin Gastrointest Dis 8: 12– 21.
4. Johnson S, Gerding DN. 1998. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. Clin Infect Dis 26: 1027– 1034.
5. Welkon CJ, Long SS, Thompson CM Jr, Gilligan PH. 1985. Clostridium difficile in patients with cystic fibrosis. Am J Dis Child 139: 805– 808.
6. Morrison RH, Hall NS, Said M, Rice T, Groff H, Brodine SK, Slymen D, Lederman ER. 2011. Risk factors associated with complications and mortality in patients with Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 53: 1173– 1178.
7. Brazier JS. 2012. Clostridium difficile: the anaerobe that made the grade. Anaerobe 18: 197– 199.
8. Petrella LA, Sambol SP, Cheknis A, Negaro K, Kean Y, Sears PS, Babakhani F, Johnson S, Gerding DN. 2012. Decreased cure and increased recurrence rates for Clostridium difficile infection caused by the epidemic C. difficile B1 Strain. Clin Infect Dis 55: 351– 357.
9. Rupnik M, Grabnar M, Geric B. 2003. Binary toxin producing Clostridium difficile strains. Anaerobe 9: 289– 294.
10. Stamper PD, Alcabase R, Aird D, Babiker W, Wehrlin J, Ikpeama I, Carroll KC. 2009. Comparison of a commercial real-time PCR assay for tcdB detection to a cell culture cytotoxicity assay and toxigenic culture for direct detection of toxin-producing Clostridium difficile in clinical samples. J Clin Microbiol 47: 373– 378.
11. Carroll KC. 2011. Tests for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection: the next generation. Anaerobe 17: 170– 174.
12. Eastwood K, Else P, Charlett A, Wilcox M. 2009. Comparison of 9 commercially available Clostridium difficile toxin detection assays, a real-time PCR assay for C. difficile tcdB, and a glutamate dehydrogenase detection assay to cytotoxin testing and cytotoxigenic culture methods. J Clin Microbiol 47: 3211– 3217.
13. Perry JD, Asir K, Halimi D, Orenga S, Dale J, Payne M, Carlton R, Evans J, Gould FK. 2010. Evaluation of a chromogenic culture medium for isolation of Clostridium difficile within 24 hrs. J Clin Microbiol 48: 3852– 3858.
14. Eckert C, Burghoffer B, Lalande V, Barbut F. 2013. Evaluation of the Chromogenic agar chromID C. difficile. J Clin Microbiol 51: 1002– 1004.
15. Darkoh C, Dupont HL, Kaplan HB. 2011. Novel one-step method for detection and isolation of active-toxin-producing Clostridium difficile strains directly from stool samples. J Clin Microbiol 49: 4219– 4224.
16. Kader HA, Piccoli DA, Jawad AF, McGowan KL, Maller ES. 1998. Single toxin detection is inadequate to diagnose Clostridium difficile diarrhea in pediatric patients. Gastroenterology 115: 1329– 1334.
17. Bélanger SD, Boissinot M, Clairoux N, F. Picard FJ, Bergeron MJ. 2005. Rapid detection of Clostridium difficile in feces by real-time PCR. J Clin Microbiol 41: 730– 734.
18. Boyanton BL, Sural P, Loomis CB, Pesta C, Gonzalez-Krellwitz L, Robinson-Dunn B, Riska P. 2012. Loop-mediated isothermal amplification compared to real-time PCR and enzyme immunoassay for toxigenic Clostridium difficile detection. J Clin Microbiol 50: 640– 645.
19. Sloan LM, Duresko BJ, Gustafson DR, Rosenblatt JE. 2007. Comparison of real-time PCR for detection of the tcdC gene with four toxin immunoassays and culture in diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection. J Clin Microbiol 46: 1996– 2001.
20. Humphries BM, Uslan DZ, Rubin Z. 2013. Performance of Clostridium difficile toxin enzyme immunoassay and nucleic acid amplifications tests stratified by patient disease severity. J Clin Microbiol 51: 869– 873.
21. Pancholi P, Raczkowski KM, Balada-Llasat JM. 2012. Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile comparison of the cell culture neutralization, Xpert C. difficile, Xpert C. difficile/Epi, and Illumigene C. difficile assays. J Clin Microbiol 50: 1331– 1335.
22. Lemee L, Dhalluin A, Testelin S, Mattrat MA, Maillard K, Lemeland JF, Pons JL. 2004. Multiplex PCR targeting tpi (triose phosphate isomerase), tcdA (toxin A), and tcdB (toxin B) genes for toxigenic culture of Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol 42: 5710– 5714.
23. Peterson LR, Manson RU, Paule SM, Hacek DM, Robicsek A, Thomson RB, Kaul KL. 2007. Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in stool samples by real-time polymerase chain reaction for the diagnosis of C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Clin Infect Dis 45: 1152– 1160.
24. Cohen SH, Gerding DN, Johnson S, Kelly CP, Loo VG, McDonald LC, Pepin J, Wilcox MH. 2010. Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile infection in adults: 2010 update by the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). Infect Cont Hosp Epidemiol 31: 431– 455.
25. Culbreath K, Ager E, Nemeyer RJ, Kerr A, Gilligan PH. 2012. Evolution of testing algorithms at a university hospital for detection of Clostridium difficile infections. J Clin Microbiol 50: 3073– 3076.
26. Reller ME, Lema CA, Perl TM, Ross TL, K. Speck A, Carroll KC. 2007. 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 45: 3601– 3605.
27. Ticehurst JR, Aird DZ, Dam LM, Borek AP, Hargrove JT, Carroll KC. 2006. Effective detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile by a two-step algorithm including tests for antigen and cytotoxin. J Clin Microbiol 44: 1145– 1149.
28. Massey V, Gregson DB, Chagla AH, Storey M, John MA, Hussain Z. 2003. Clinical Usefulness of Components of the Triage Immunoassay, Enzyme Immunoassay for Toxins A and B, and Cytotoxin B Tissue Culture Assay for the Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Diarrhea. Am J Clin Pathol 119: 45– 49.
29. Deshpande A, Pasupuleti V, Pant C, Hall G, Jain A. 2010. Potential value of repeat stool testing for Clostridium difficile stool toxin using enzyme immunoassay? Curr Med Res Opin 26: 2635– 2641.
30. Aichinger E, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS, Nyre LM, Patel R. 2008. Nonutility of repeat laboratory testing for detection of Clostridium difficile by use of PCR or enzyme immunoassay. J Clin Microbiol 46: 3795– 3797.
31. Stevens DL, Bryant AE, Berger A, von Eichel-Streiber C. 2011. Clostridium, p 834– 57. In Versalovic J, Carroll KC, Funke G, Jorgensen JH, Landry ML, Warnock DW (ed), Manual of Clinical Microbiology, 10th ed. ASM Press, Washington, DC.
32. Buchan BW, Mackey TLA, Daly JA, Alger G, Denys GA, Peterson LR, Kehl SC, Ledeboer NA. 2012. Multicenter clinical evaluation of the portrait toxigenic C. difficile assay for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile strains in clinical stool specimens. J Clin Microbiol 50: 3932– 3936.
33. Hicke B, Pasko C, Groves B, Ager E, Corpuz M, Frech G, Munns D, Smith W, Warcup A, Denys G, Ledeboer NA, Lindsey W, Owen C, Rea L, Jension R. 2012. Automated detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in clinical samples: Isothermal tcdB amplification coupled to array-based detection. J Clin Microbiol 50: 2681– 2687.
34. Gyorke CE, Wang S, Leslie JL, Cohen SH, Solnick JV, Polage CR. 2013. Evaluation of Clostridium difficile fecal load and limit of detection during a prospective comparison of two molecular tests, the Illumigene C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi tests. J Clin Microbiol 51: 278– 280
35. Le Guern R, Herwegh S, Grandbastien B, Courcl R, Wallet F. 2012. Evaluation of a new Molecular test, the BD Max Cdiff, for detection of toxigenic C. difficile in fecal samples. J Clin Microbiol 50: 3089– 3090.
36. Huang HA, Weintraub A, Fang H, Nord CE. 2009. Comparison of a multiplex real-time PCR to the cell toxicity neutralization assay for diagnosis of C. difficile infections. J Clin Microbiol 47: 3729– 3731.
37. Terhes G, Urban E, Soki J, Nacsa E, Nagy E. 2009. Comparison of a rapid molecular method, the BD GeneOhm Cdiff assay, to the most frequently used laboratory tests for detection of toxin-producing Clostridium difficile in diarrheal feces. J Clin Microbiol 47: 3478– 3481.
38. Doing KM, Hintz MS, Keefe C, Horne S, LeVasseur S, Kulikowski ML. 2010. Reevaluation of the Premier Clostridium difficile toxin A and B immunoassay with comparison to glutamate dehydrogenase common antigen testing evaluating Bartels cytotoxin and Prodesse ProGastro Cd polymerase chain reaction as confirmatory procedures. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 66: 129– 134.
39. Ota KV, McGowan KL. 2012. Clostridium difficile testing algorithms using glutamate dehydrogenase antigen and C. difficile toxin enzyme immunoassays with C. difficile nucleic acid amplification testing increase diagnostic yield in a tertiary pediatric population. J Clin Microbiol 50: 1185– 1188.
40. Hink T, Burnham CD, Dubberke ER. 2012. A systematic evaluation of methods to optimize culture-based recovery of Clostridium difficile from stool specimens. Anaerobe 19: 39– 43.

Tables

Clostridium difficile as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis
[com.pub2web.rdf.cci.facet.ContentItem[id=http://asm.metastore.ingenta.com/content/author/10.1128/9781555818814.chap4.15-1,webId=/content/author/10.1128/9781555818814.chap4.15-1,properties={foaf_givenname=Gerri S., foaf_name=Gerri S. Hall, foaf_surname=Hall}]]
Citation: Hall G. 2016. as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis, p 4.15.1-4.15.7. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.15
/content/10.1128/9781555818814.chap4.15.table4.15-1
Table 4.15–1
Comparison of available NAATs for detection of toxigenic
Generic image for table
Table 4.15–1

Comparison of available NAATs for detection of toxigenic

Citation: Hall G. 2016. as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis, p 4.15.1-4.15.7. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.15
/content/10.1128/9781555818814.chap4.15.table4.15-2
Table 4.15–2
Comparison of NAAT methods for detection of toxigenic
Generic image for table
Table 4.15–2

Comparison of NAAT methods for detection of toxigenic

Citation: Hall G. 2016. as a Pathogen Involved in Antimicrobial Agent-Associated Diarrhea, Colitis, and Pseudomembranous Colitis, p 4.15.1-4.15.7. In Leber A (ed), Clinical Microbiology Procedures Handbook, Fourth Edition. ASM Press, Washington, DC. doi: 10.1128/9781555818814.ch4.15

Back to top
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Please check the format of the address you have entered.
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error