COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of the clinical course of Clostridium difficile infection in glutamate dehydrogenase-positive toxin-negative patients diagnosed by PCR to those with a positive toxin test.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the potential role of PCR-based assays in the over-diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) by using a validated diagnostic algorithm in daily clinical practice.

METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study evaluating all C. difficile-positive stool samples identified at our institution during a 12-month period, to compare outcomes and recurrence rates between patients with a positive enzyme immunoassay (EIA) for both glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and toxin A/B ('toxin-positive group'), with those with GDH-positive, toxin-negative samples in whom the diagnosis was made by a positive PCR-based assay ('toxin- /PCR+ group'). Medical records were reviewed by two independent investigators blinded to the mode of diagnosis.

RESULTS: We analysed 231 first CDI episodes (106 (45.8 %) in the 'toxin-positive group' and 125 (54.1%) in the 'toxin- /PCR+ group'). Both groups had similar baseline characteristics. Patients in the 'toxin-positive group' presented more frequently with a severe/severe complicated form than those in the 'toxin- /PCR+ group' (36 (33.9%) versus 24 (19.2%); p 0.011) and had more recurrences (27 (25.5%) versus 9 (7.2%); p 0.001). Diagnosis of CDI based on a GDH/toxin-positive EIA independently predicted severe/severe-complicated course (adjusted OR 2.11; 95% CI 1.06-4.22; p 0.033) and recurrence (adjusted OR 3.79; 95% CI 1.65-8.69; p 0.002). There were no differences in all-cause mortality (12.3% versus 12.0%; p 0.95) or CDI-attributable mortality (4.7% versus 4.8%; p 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS: Toxin-positive patients were more likely to have severe-complicated forms of CDI and recurrences. Nevertheless, CDI-related complications may still occasionally occur among toxin-negative patients diagnosed by PCR, which stresses the need for individualized clinical evaluation.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app