4.7 Article

Clinical Application of Polymerase Chain Reaction to Diagnose Clostridium difficile in Hospitalized Patients With Diarrhea

期刊

CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
卷 2, 期 8, 页码 669-674

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1542-3565(04)00290-3

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background & Aims: Clostridium difficile is a common cause of diarrhea in hospitalized patients and is associated with significant morbidity and cost. The current diagnostic standard, enzyme immunoassay (EIA), has low sensitivity, leading to duplicate testing and empiric treatment. We sought to show the usefulness and potential cost effectiveness of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplification of toxin B gene for diagnosis of C. difficile-induced diarrhea. Methods: A total of 148 stool samples from academic and community-based hospitals were sent for EIA testing and were evaluated prospectively for the presence of toxin B gene by PCR. Results were compared with EIA regarding sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values. Medical charts were reviewed to determine the following: (1) number of EIAs sent per admission, (2) number sent within a 24-hour time period, and (3) how caregivers practiced based on EIA results. Results: The mean age of 130 patients was 55 years. EIA and PCR were positive in 6.8% and 13.6% of patients, respectively. EIA sensitivity was 40%, specificity was 98%, and positive and negative predictive values were 80% and 91%, respectively. The cost of the PCR was $22/sample. Empiric treatment for C. difficile was given unnecessarily in 42% of EIA-negative results. Thirty percent of patients had 3 or more EIAs sent during their hospital admission. Of patients with multiple samples sent, 57% had more than 1 sample sent in a 24-hour period. Conclusions: Many physicians do not conform to practice guidelines regarding recommended diagnosis and empiric treatment of C. difficile. Toxin B gene PCR represents a more sensitive and potentially cost-effective method to diagnose C. difficile-induced diarrhea than EIA and should be considered for use as an alternative diagnostic standard.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据