Evaluation of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B rapid tests for Clostridioides (prev. Clostridium) difficile diagnosis in a university hospital in Minas Gerais, Brazil

Clostridioides ( Clostridium ) difficile is responsible for most cases of nosocomial diarrhea and, despite the high prevalence of the disease worldwide, the best laboratory diagnostic approach to diagnose C. difficile infection (CDI) is a subject of ongoing debate. Although the use of multiple tests...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Brazilian journal of microbiology 2020-09, Vol.51 (3), p.1139-1143
Hauptverfasser: Ramos, Carolina Pantuzza, Lopes, Emily Oliveira, Diniz, Amanda Nádia, Lobato, Francisco Carlos Faria, Vilela, Eduardo Garcia, Silva, Rodrigo Otávio Silveira
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Clostridioides ( Clostridium ) difficile is responsible for most cases of nosocomial diarrhea and, despite the high prevalence of the disease worldwide, the best laboratory diagnostic approach to diagnose C. difficile infection (CDI) is a subject of ongoing debate. Although the use of multiple tests is recommended, the cost of these algorithms commonly exceeds the affordability in some countries. Thus, to improve CDI diagnosis in a university hospital in Brazil, this study analyzed two immunochromatographic tests and one enzyme immunoassay (ELISA) to evaluate the detection of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and A/B toxins of C. difficile . Stool samples of 89 adult patients presenting nosocomial diarrhea during hospitalization were included. The toxigenic culture was used as the reference method. GDH detection by both commercial tests showed high sensitivity (100%) and specificity (92.1%). On the other hand, toxin-based methods showed a sensitivity between 19.2 and 57.7%. In conclusion, the results suggest that rapid tests for GDH detection are not only suitable for CDI diagnosis as screening tests but also as a single method.
ISSN:1517-8382
1678-4405
DOI:10.1007/s42770-020-00288-z