Previous Article | Next Article 
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2001, p. 1996-1998, Vol. 39, No. 5
Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Hôpital Central,
Centre Hospitalier et Universitaire, 54035 Nancy
Cedex,1 and Service de Maladies
Infectieuses et Tropicales, Hôpital de Brabois, Centre
Hospitalier et Universitaire, 54500 Vandoeuvre,2
France
Received 27 October 2000/Returned for modification 20 December
2000/Accepted 5 February 2001
Detection of Clostridium difficile toxins A and B in
stools by Premier Cytoclone A+B enzyme immunoassay (EIA) was compared with detection by stool culture for C. difficile followed
by detection of toxigenic isolates using the same EIA. Chart reviews
were performed to evaluate the likelihood of C. difficile-associated diarrhea and colitis (CADC) for all patients
with at least one positive toxin assay. While the toxins were detected
in 58 of 85 consecutive CADC patients by both assays, CADC in 5 patients was detected only by stool toxin assay, and in 22 patients
CADC was detected only by toxigenic culture. Our results suggest that
for laboratories using a rapid toxin A+B EIA, direct toxin detection in
stools should be combined with toxigenic culture in cases in which
there is a negative stool toxin assay.
Clostridium
difficile causes mainly nosocomial enteric diseases that
range from antibiotic-associated diarrhea to pseudomembranous colitis
(PMC) (13). Various laboratory methods may be used to diagnose C. difficile-associated diarrhea and colitis
(CADC), but the two main approaches currently available are based on
detection of toxin A, toxin B, or both in stool specimens and detection of toxigenic strains after stool culture (toxigenic culture) (6, 7, 11, 19). Although different data support the idea that both
methods are necessary for optimal diagnosis of CADC (4, 5,
10-12, 18, 19, 21), the value of toxigenic culture is still a
topic of debate (6, 20). Toxin A-negative, toxin B-positive, and both toxin A-positive and toxin B-negative C. difficile strains may be pathogenic in humans (1, 8,
15). Thus, methods used for toxin detection in stools and/or
detection of toxigenic strains should ideally detect both toxins
(14). For toxigenic culture, such an approach has been
realized until now in only a few studies using both a toxin A enzyme
immunoassay (EIA) and a cytotoxin assay (4, 10, 21). The
cytotoxin assay is considered the most sensitive method for detecting
toxin B in stools, but it requires the use of cell culture and
antitoxin and is not well standardized. This limits its use in many
clinical laboratories. Commercially available rapid EIAs that detect
both toxins have been shown to accurately detect toxins in stools
(3, 9, 16, 17) and may represent a more practical method
among diagnostic strategies that combine detection of toxins in stools with toxigenic culture.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the usefulness of such a test,
the Premier Cytoclone A+B EIA (Meridian Diagnostics, Inc., Cincinnati,
Ohio), in identifying CADC patients by stool toxin assay and/or
toxigenic culture.
A total of 1,104 consecutive diarrheal stool samples obtained from 720 patients in our hospital was sent to our laboratory with a request for
C. difficile toxin detection and tested by all assays in
parallel. Specimens were processed immediately or stored at 4°C for
Of the 1,104 specimens tested, results for 130 (89 of 720 patients
[12.4%]) were positive by stool toxin assay and/or toxigenic culture. Of the remaining 974 specimens, stool culture yielded nontoxigenic isolates of C. difficile in 19 from 12 patients. Cultures containing both toxin-positive and toxin-negative
strains were not observed. Both direct toxin detection and toxigenic
culture produced positive results for 82 specimens (58 of 89 patients [65.2%]). There were 38 specimens (26 of 89 patients [29.2%]) with stool toxin-negative and toxigenic culture-positive results. Ten
specimens (from 5 of 89 patients [5.6%]) were positive only when
tested by stool toxin assay, whereas culture results were negative. EIA
indeterminate results were found in 22 of 1,104 specimens (2%) and 2 of 139 (1.4%) C. difficile strains. By repeating the EIA,
all of the indeterminate results were resolved: results were considered
to be positive for three specimens and one strain and negative for the
remaining specimens and strains. Charts could be reviewed for all
patients with at least one positive toxin assay (Table
1). These patients consisted of 37 males
and 52 females (mean age, 61 years; range, 2.5 to 99 years). The
clinical likelihood of CADC was considered unlikely for four patients
aged 6, 22, 78, and 87 years because of rapid and spontaneous
improvement of symptoms. Among the other 85 patients, 18 underwent
colonoscopy, which permitted the diagnosis of PMC to be established in
11 cases. Patients for whom colonoscopy did not demonstrate PMC were
all considered as having probable CADC. One child <3 years of age (2.5 years) was considered to have probable CADC. With the "gold standard" of stool toxin assay and/or toxigenic culture producing positive results and chart review providing evidence of probable or
definite CADC, the sensitivities and specificities for direct toxin
assay, toxigenic culture, and direct toxin assay plus toxigenic culture
were 74.1 and 100%, 94.1 and 99.3%, and 100 and 99.3%, respectively.
0095-1137/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.5.1996-1998.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Laboratory Diagnosis of Clostridium
difficile-Associated Diarrhea and Colitis: Usefulness of
Premier Cytoclone A+B Enzyme Immunoassay for Combined Detection of
Stool Toxins and Toxigenic C. difficile
Strains
ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
TEXT
Top
Abstract
Text
References
48 h prior to assay. Part of each sample was set aside and kept at
80°C for later follow-up testing if required. Toxins were detected
in stools by the Premier Cytoclone A+B EIA, which is a rapid EIA that
utilizes microwells coated with toxin A- and B-specific monoclonal
antibodies. The test was performed according to the manufacturer's
instructions. Positive and negative controls were included with each
assay. Absorbance was read spectrophotometrically at 450 nm within 15 min. The absorbance values (optical density [OD]) were interpreted
according to the manufacturer's instructions as follows: OD < 0.200, negative; 0.200 OD < 0.250, indeterminate; OD 
0.250, positive. A portion of each specimen was inoculated onto
brain-heart infusion agar supplemented with 5% sheep blood, 0.1%
sodium taurocholate, cycloserine (250 mg/liter), and cefoxitin (8 mg/liter) (4). Plates were incubated in an anaerobic
chamber for 48 h at 35°C. Colonies that were suspected of being
C. difficile on the basis of characteristic morphology,
odor, and Gram stain morphology were identified using conventional
biochemical methods (2). All isolates were negative for
lipase, lecithinase, and indole production as well as for milk
digestion. These isolates were positive for gelatin and esculin
hydrolysis and fermented glucose and mannitol but did not ferment
maltose or sucrose. The colonies were subcultured (three
colonies/culture-positive sample) anaerobically onto Wilkins Chalgren
agar supplemented with 5% sheep blood for 24 h at 35°C.
Colonies obtained by subculture were mixed with 100 µl of kit diluent
before being tested for toxin production in the same way as for stool
samples. When a specimen yielded a positive result with at least one
toxin assay, the patient's charts were reviewed, and the patient was
evaluated for the likelihood of having CADC, using slightly modified
criteria of Peterson et al. (18). Clinical likelihood of
CADC was considered as probable if all of the following criteria were
met: (i) presence of diarrhea, defined as at least three stools per day
for at least 48 h, (ii) antimicrobial therapy within 8 weeks of
the onset of symptoms, (iii) absence of another recognized cause of
diarrhea, and (iv) improvement of symptoms in response to therapy with
metronidazole or vancomycin or after antibiotic withdrawal. If PMC
could also be demonstrated by colonoscopy, the clinical likelihood was
considered definite.
TABLE 1.
Analysis of clinical data of patients with positive
direct toxin assay in stools and/or toxigenic culture
When chart reviews were performed to establish diagnoses of CADC, the previously reported sensitivities and specificities of the Cytoclone A+B EIA ranged from 75.5 to 84.5%, and from 97.8 to 100%, respectively (4, 9), whereas the previously reported sensitivities and specificities of toxigenic culture ranged from 94.7 to 96.4% and from 98.6 to 99.1%, respectively (4, 10). These performances are comparable to those observed in our study. Our evaluation also confirms earlier data indicating that stool culture followed by toxin determination on isolates will result in a significantly higher number of CADC cases being detected than when the same toxin assays are performed directly on stools (4, 5, 10, 11, 18, 19, 21). In our study, 63 of the 85 CADC patients (74.1%) could be identified using stool toxin assay, but 22 CADC patients (25.9%), including 3 patients with PMC, would have been missed if toxin detection in stools had been used alone. It is conceivable that testing multiple specimens on patients belonging to this group might improve the detection rate of the stool toxin assay. Only three of these patients had multiple specimens (three to five specimens per patient), obtained over a 4- to 8-day period. However, all of these specimens were negative when tested by the stool toxin assay. In our study, five CADC patients had toxin-positive but culture-negative stools (10 specimens). This result may be explained by sampling problems inherent to the uneven distribution of C. difficile in the fecal samples but also, for three of these patients (seven specimens), by the fact that they were already on therapy when the stools were collected (7).
The major objection made against the use of toxigenic culture as a diagnostic tool is that toxigenic culture-positive/and stool toxin assay-negative patients may be asymptomatic carriers (20). Unfortunately, it is difficult to have a clear idea on this point since in most of the studies in which toxigenic culture was shown to be more sensitive than stool toxin assay, clinical data were incomplete or partially unavailable. In the present study, the analysis of all of the charts of patients with at least one positive test showed that only four patients, who all tested negative with stool toxin assay and positive with toxigenic culture, were considered to be carriers. It has been suggested that the detection of toxins in stools by EIA, coupled with testing strains for toxigenicity only in those cases in which direct toxin assay produces negative results, may be a satisfactory strategy, especially in laboratories without tissue culture facilities (7). Such an approach would have allowed us to reduce the number of strains tested for toxigenicity from 139 to 57 without alteration of the CADC detection rate. Rapid diagnosis of CADC is required in order to initiate specific antibiotic treatment and to take adequate measures to control nosocomial spread. Direct toxin detection in stools is obviously a more rapid method than toxigenic culture, results of which may, however, be obtained more rapidly, within approximately 76 h, when colonies are tested using a rapid toxin EIA. Thus, Premier Cytoclone A+B represents a helpful and practical test, which can be used both on stools and secondarily on colonies for routine investigation of antibiotic-associated diarrhea.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Laboratoire de Bactériologie, Hôpital Central, 29, Avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 54035 Nancy Cedex, France. Phone: (33) 3-83-85-14-34. Fax: (33) 3-83-85-26-73. E-mail: f.mory{at}chu-nancy.fr.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
Top
Abstract
Text
References
|
|---|
| 1. | al-Barrak, A., J. Embil, B. Dyck, K. Olekson, D. Nicoll, M. Alfa, and A. Kabani. 1999. An outbreak of toxin A negative, toxin B positive Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in a Canadian tertiary-care hospital. Can. Commun. Dis. Rep. 25:65-69[Medline]. |
| 2. | Allen, S. D., C. L. Emery, and J. A. Siders. 1999. Clostridium, p. 654-671. In P. R. Murray, E. J. Baron, M. A. Pfaller, F. C. Tenover, and R. H. Yolken (ed.), Manual of clinical microbiology, 7th ed. American Society for Microbiology Press, Washington, D.C. |
| 3. |
Arrow, S. A.,
L. Croese,
R. A. Bowman, and T. V. Riley.
1994.
Evaluation of three commercial enzyme immunoassay kits for detecting faecal Clostridium difficile toxins.
J. Clin. Pathol.
47:954-956 |
| 4. |
Barbut, F.,
C. Kajzer,
N. Planas, and J. C. Petit.
1993.
Comparison of three enzyme immunoassays, a cytotoxicity assay, and toxigenic culture for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
31:963-967 |
| 5. | Bond, F., G. Payne, S. P. Borriello, and H. Humphreys. 1995. Usefulness of culture in the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 14:223-226[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 6. |
Brazier, J. S.
1998.
The diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated disease.
J. Antimicrob. Chemother.
41(Suppl. C):29-40 |
| 7. | Brazier, J. S. 1993. Role of the laboratory in investigations of Clostridium difficile diarrhea. Clin. Infect. Dis. 16(Suppl. 4):S228-S233. |
| 8. | Cohen, S. H., Y. J. Tang, B. Hansen, and J. Silva, Jr. 1998. Isolation of a toxin B-deficient mutant strain of Clostridium difficile in a case of recurrent C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Clin. Infect. Dis. 26:410-412[Medline]. |
| 9. |
Doern, G. V.,
R. T. Coughlin, and L. Wu.
1992.
Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated gastrointestinal disease: comparison of a monoclonal antibody enzyme immunoassay for toxins A and B with a monoclonal antibody enzyme immunoassay for toxin A only and two cytotoxicity assays.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
30:2042-2046 |
| 10. |
Fedorko, D. P.,
H. D. Engler,
E. M. O'Shaughnessy,
E. C. Williams,
C. J. Reichelderfer, and W. I. Smith, Jr.
1999.
Evaluation of two rapid assays for detection of Clostridium difficile toxin A in stool specimens.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
37:3044-3047 |
| 11. | Gerding, D. N., S. Johnson, L. R. Peterson, M. E. Mulligan, and J. Silva, Jr. 1995. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and colitis: SHEA position paper. Infect. Control Hosp. Epidemiol. 16:459-477[Medline]. |
| 12. |
Gerding, D. N.,
M. M. Olson,
L. R. Peterson,
D. G. Teasley,
R. L. Gebhard,
M. L. Schwartz, and J. T. Lee, Jr.
1986.
Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and colitis in adults. A prospective case-controlled epidemiologic study.
Arch. Intern. Med.
146:95-100 |
| 13. | Johnson, S., and D. N. Gerding. 1998. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. Clin. Infect. Dis. 26:1027-1036[Medline]. |
| 14. | Kader, H. A., D. A. Piccoli, A. F. Jawad, K. L. McGowan, and E. S. Maller. 1998. Single toxin detection is inadequate to diagnose Clostridium difficile diarrhea in pediatric patients. Gastroenterology 115:1329-1334[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 15. |
Limaye, A. P.,
D. K. Turgeon,
B. T. Cookson, and T. R. Fritsche.
2000.
Pseudomembranous colitis caused by a toxin A B+ strain of Clostridium difficile.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
38:1696-1697 |
| 16. |
Lyerly, D. M.,
L. M. Neville,
D. T. Evans,
J. Fill,
S. Allen,
W. Greene,
R. Sautter,
P. Hnatuck,
D. J. Torpey, and R. Schwalbe.
1998.
Multicenter evaluation of the Clostridium difficile TOX A/B TEST.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
36:184-190 |
| 17. |
Mertz, C. S.,
C. Kramer,
M. Forman,
L. Gluck,
K. Mills,
K. Senft,
I. Steiman,
N. Wallace, and P. Charache.
1994.
Comparison of four commercially available rapid enzyme immunoassays with cytotoxin assay for detection of Clostridium difficile toxin(s) from stool specimens.
J. Clin. Microbiol.
32:1142-1147 |
| 18. | Peterson, L. R., P. J. Kelly, and H. A. Nordbrock. 1996. Role of culture and toxin detection in laboratory testing for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 15:330-336[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 19. | Peterson, L. R., and P. J. Kelly. 1993. The role of the clinical microbiology laboratory in the management of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. Infect. Dis. Clin. N. Am. 7:277-293[Medline]. |
| 20. | Settle, C. D., and M. H. Wilcox. 1997. Clostridium difficile toxin A detection on colonies. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 3:388-389[Medline]. |
| 21. | Thonnard, J., F. Carreer, V. Avesani, and M. Delmée. 1996. Toxin A detection on Clostridium difficile colonies from 24-h cultures. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2:50-54[Medline]. |
Journal of Clinical Microbiology, May 2001, p. 1996-1998, Vol. 39, No. 5
0095-1137/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/JCM.39.5.1996-1998.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Shin, B.-M., Kuak, E. Y., Lee, E. J., Songer, J. G.
(2009). Algorithm Combining Toxin Immunoassay and Stool Culture for Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection. J. Clin. Microbiol.
47: 2952-2956
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Monaghan, T, Boswell, T, Mahida, Y R
(2009). Recent advances in Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Postgrad. Med. J.
85: 152-162
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
She, R. C., Durrant, R. J., Petti, C. A.
(2009). Evaluation of Enzyme Immunoassays to Detect Clostridium difficile Toxin From Anaerobic Stool Culture. Am J Clin Pathol
131: 81-84
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Monaghan, T, Boswell, T, Mahida, Y R
(2008). Recent advances in Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Gut
57: 850-860
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Garcia, C., Samalvides, F., Vidal, M., Gotuzzo, E., Dupont, H. L.
(2007). Epidemiology of Clostridium difficile Associated Diarrhea in a Peruvian Tertiary Care Hospital. Am J Trop Med Hyg
77: 802-805
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Crabtree, T., Aitchison, D., Meyers, B. F., Tymkew, H., Smith, J. R., Guthrie, T. J., Munfakh, N., Moon, M. R., Pasque, M. K., Lawton, J., Moazami, N., Damiano, R. J. Jr
(2007). Clostridium Difficile in Cardiac Surgery: Risk Factors and Impact on Postoperative Outcome. Ann. Thorac. Surg.
83: 1396-1402
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Surowiec, D., Kuyumjian, A. G, Wynd, M. A, Cicogna, C. E
(2006). Past, Present, and Future Therapies for Clostridium difficile-Associated Disease. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy
40: 2155-2163
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Garey, K. W, Graham, G., Gerard, L., Dao, T., Jiang, Z. D., Price, M., DuPont, H. L
(2006). Prevalence of Diarrhea at a University Hospital and Association with Modifiable Risk Factors. The Annals of Pharmacotherapy
40: 1030-1034
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Delmee, M., Van Broeck, J., Simon, A., Janssens, M., Avesani, V.
(2005). Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea: a plea for culture. J Med Microbiol
54: 187-191
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Lemee, L., Dhalluin, A., Testelin, S., Mattrat, M.-A., Maillard, K., Lemeland, J.-F., Pons, J.-L.
(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
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Johal, S S, Hammond, J, Solomon, K, James, P D, Mahida, Y R
(2004). Clostridium difficile associated diarrhoea in hospitalised patients: onset in the community and hospital and role of flexible sigmoidoscopy. Gut
53: 673-677
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Turgeon, D. K., Novicki, T. J., Quick, J., Carlson, L., Miller, P., Ulness, B., Cent, A., Ashley, R., Larson, A., Coyle, M., Limaye, A. P., Cookson, B. T., Fritsche, T. R.
(2003). Six Rapid Tests for Direct Detection of Clostridium difficile and Its Toxins in Fecal Samples Compared with the Fibroblast Cytotoxicity Assay. J. Clin. Microbiol.
41: 667-670
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Bartlett, J. G.
(2002). Antibiotic-Associated Diarrhea. NEJM
346: 334-339
[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»