This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Right arrow Copyright Information
Right arrow Books from ASM Press
Right arrow MicrobeWorld
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Borek, A. P.
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, K. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Borek, A. P.
Right arrow Articles by Carroll, K. C.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, June 2005, p. 2994-2995, Vol. 43, No. 6
0095-1137/05/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.43.6.2994-2995.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Frequency of Sample Submission for Optimal Utilization of the Cell Culture Cytotoxicity Assay for Detection of Clostridium difficile Toxin

Anita P. Borek,* Deborah Z. Aird, and Karen C. Carroll

Division of Microbiology, Department of Pathology, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Meyer B1-193, 600 N. Wolfe St., Baltimore, Maryland 21287

Received 17 November 2004/ Returned for modification 20 January 2005/ Accepted 16 February 2005

We reviewed the results of repeated sample submissions within a 7-day time frame for Clostridium difficile toxin testing. A total of 2,940 samples were tested during a 3-month period using a cell culture cytotoxicity assay (CCCA). The results from all second samples (n = 1,101) were concordant with the original test result. In only two cases (0.8%; n = 247) was a third sample positive when the first two samples were negative. In this study, submission of multiple samples for CCCA did not increase detection of Clostridium difficile infection.

* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Johns Hopkins Hospital, Meyer Building, Room B1-193, 600 N. Wolfe St., Baltimore, MD 21287-7093. Phone: (410) 955-5077. Fax: (410) 614-8087. E-mail: aborek1{at}jhmi.edu.

Journal of Clinical Microbiology, June 2005, p. 2994-2995, Vol. 43, No. 6
0095-1137/05/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/JCM.43.6.2994-2995.2005
Copyright © 2005, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.



This article has been cited by other articles:

  • Aichinger, E., Schleck, C. D., Harmsen, W. S., Nyre, L. M., 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 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Cardona, D. M., Rand, K. H. (2008). Evaluation of Repeat Clostridium difficile Enzyme Immunoassay Testing. J. Clin. Microbiol. 46: 3686-3689 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Reller, M. E., Lema, C. A., Perl, T. M., Cai, M., Ross, T. L., Speck, K. A., Carroll, K. C. (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 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Bartlett, J. G. (2006). Narrative Review: The New Epidemic of Clostridium difficile-Associated Enteric Disease.. ANN INTERN MED 145: 758-764 [Abstract] [Full Text]  
  • Ticehurst, J. R., Aird, D. Z., Dam, L. M., Borek, A. P., Hargrove, J. T., Carroll, K. C. (2006). Effective Detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile by a Two-Step Algorithm Including Tests for Antigen and Cytotoxin.. J. Clin. Microbiol. 44: 1145-1149 [Abstract] [Full Text]  


Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology.   For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»