Background The magnitude and scope of Clostridium difficile infection in the United States continue to evolve. Methods In 2011, we performed active population- and laboratory-based surveillance across 10 geographic areas in the United States to identify cases of C. difficile infection (stool specimens positive for C. difficile on either toxin or molecular assay in residents ≥1 year of age). Cases were classified as community-associated or health care–associated. In a sample of cases of C. difficile infection, specimens were cultured and isolates underwent molecular typing. We used regression models to calculate estimates of national incidence and total number of infections, first recurrences, and deaths within 30 days after the diagnosis of C. difficile infection. Results A total of 15,461 cases of C. difficile infection were identified in the 10 geographic areas; 65.8% were health care–associated, but only 24.2% had onset during hospitalization. After adjustment for predictors of disease incidence, the estimated number of incident C. difficile infections in the United States was 453,000 (95% confidence interval [CI], 397,100 to 508,500). The incidence was estimated to be higher among females (rate ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.25 to 1.27), whites (rate ratio, 1.72; 95% CI, 1.56 to 2.0), and persons 65 years of age or older (rate ratio, 8.65; 95% CI, 8.16 to 9.31). The estimated number of first recurrences of C. difficile infection was 83,000 (95% CI, 57,000 to 108,900), and the estimated number of deaths was 29,300 (95% CI, 16,500 to 42,100). The North American pulsed-field gel electrophoresis type 1 (NAP1) strain was more prevalent among health care–associated infections than among community-associated infections (30.7% vs. 18.8%, P<0.001) Conclusions C. difficile was responsible for almost half a million infections and was associated with approximately 29,000 deaths in 2011. (Funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.)

/pdf/burden-of-clostridium-difficile-infection-in-the-united-rzdw95jlaf.pdf

Burden of Clostridium difficile Infection in the United States

A panel of experts was convened by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA) to update the 2010 clinical practice guideline on Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in adults. The update, which has incorporated recommendations for children (following the adult recommendations for epidemiology, diagnosis, and treatment), includes significant changes in the management of this infection and reflects the evolving controversy over best methods for diagnosis. Clostridium difficile remains the most important cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea and has become the most commonly identified cause of healthcare-associated infection in adults in the United States. Moreover, C. difficile has established itself as an important community pathogen. Although the prevalence of the epidemic and virulent ribotype 027 strain has declined markedly along with overall CDI rates in parts of Europe, it remains one of the most commonly identified strains in the United States where it causes a sizable minority of CDIs, especially healthcare-associated CDIs. This guideline updates recommendations regarding epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, infection prevention, and environmental management.

/pdf/clinical-practice-guidelines-for-clostridium-difficile-4hs0j01jnf.pdf

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Clostridium difficile Infection in Adults and Children: 2017 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA)

Importance Clostridium difficile is a major cause of health care–associated infection, but disagreement between diagnostic tests is an ongoing barrier to clinical decision making and public health reporting. Molecular tests are increasingly used to diagnose C difficile infection (CDI), but many molecular test-positive patients lack toxins that historically defined disease, making it unclear if they need treatment. Objective To determine the natural history and need for treatment of patients who are toxin immunoassay negative and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) positive (Tox−/PCR+) for CDI. Design, Setting, and Participants Prospective observational cohort study at a single academic medical center among 1416 hospitalized adults tested for C difficile toxins 72 hours or longer after admission between December 1, 2010, and October 20, 2012. The analysis was conducted in stages with revisions from April 27, 2013, to January 13, 2015. Main Outcomes and Measures Patients undergoing C difficile testing were grouped by US Food and Drug Administration–approved toxin and PCR tests as Tox+/PCR+, Tox−/PCR+, or Tox−/PCR−. Toxin results were reported clinically. Polymerase chain reaction results were not reported. The main study outcomes were duration of diarrhea during up to 14 days of treatment, rate of CDI-related complications (ie, colectomy, megacolon, or intensive care unit care) and CDI-related death within 30 days. Results Twenty-one percent (293 of 1416) of hospitalized adults tested for C difficile were positive by PCR, but 44.7% (131 of 293) had toxins detected by the clinical toxin test. At baseline, Tox−/PCR+ patients had lower C difficile bacterial load and less antibiotic exposure, fecal inflammation, and diarrhea than Tox+/PCR+ patients ( P P  = .003) and was similar to that in Tox−/PCR− patients (2 days; interquartile range, 1-3 days), despite minimal empirical treatment of Tox−/PCR+ patients. No CDI-related complications occurred in Tox−/PCR+ patients vs 10 complications in Tox+/PCR+ patients (0% vs 7.6%, P P  = .001). Conclusions and Relevance Among hospitalized adults with suspected CDI, virtually all CDI-related complications and deaths occurred in patients with positive toxin immunoassay test results. Patients with a positive molecular test result and a negative toxin immunoassay test result had outcomes that were comparable to patients without C difficile by either method. Exclusive reliance on molecular tests for CDI diagnosis without tests for toxins or host response is likely to result in overdiagnosis, overtreatment, and increased health care costs.

/pdf/overdiagnosis-of-clostridium-difficile-infection-in-the-2812ogfw8m.pdf

Overdiagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection in the Molecular Test Era

Summary Background Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection is controversial because of many laboratory methods, compounded by two reference methods. Cytotoxigenic culture detects toxigenic C difficile and gives a positive result more frequently (eg, because of colonisation, which means that individuals can have the bacterium but no free toxin) than does the cytotoxin assay, which detects preformed toxin in faeces. We aimed to validate the reference methods according to clinical outcomes and to derive an optimum laboratory diagnostic algorithm for C difficile infection. Methods In this prospective, multicentre study, we did cytotoxigenic culture and cytotoxin assays on 12 420 faecal samples in four UK laboratories. We also performed tests that represent the three main targets for C difficile detection: bacterium (glutamate dehydrogenase), toxins, or toxin genes. We used routine blood test results, length of hospital stay, and 30-day mortality to clinically validate the reference methods. Data were categorised by reference method result: group 1, cytotoxin assay positive; group 2, cytotoxigenic culture positive and cytotoxin assay negative; and group 3, both reference methods negative. Findings Clinical and reference assay data were available for 6522 inpatient episodes. On univariate analysis, mortality was significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2 (72/435 [16·6%] vs 20/207 [9·7%], p=0·044) and in group 3 (503/5880 [8·6%], p Interpretation We noted no increase in mortality when toxigenic C difficile alone was present. Toxin (cytotoxin assay) positivity correlated with clinical outcome, and so this reference method best defines true cases of C difficile infection. A new diagnostic category of potential C difficile excretor (cytotoxigenic culture positive but cytotoxin assay negative) could be used to characterise patients with diarrhoea that is probably not due to C difficile infection, but who can cause cross-infection. Funding Department of Health and Health Protection Agency, UK.

https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/laninf/PIIS1473-3099(13)70200-7.pdf

Differences in outcome according to Clostridium difficile testing method: a prospective multicentre diagnostic validation study of C difficile infection

Clostridium difficile is a formidable nosocomial and community-acquired pathogen, causing clinical presentations ranging from asymptomatic colonization to self-limiting diarrhea to toxic megacolon and fulminant colitis. Since the early 2000s, the incidence of C. difficile disease has increased dramatically, and this is thought to be due to the emergence of new strain types. For many years, the mainstay of C. difficile disease diagnosis was enzyme immunoassays for detection of the C. difficile toxin(s), although it is now generally accepted that these assays lack sensitivity. A number of molecular assays are commercially available for the detection of C. difficile. This review covers the history and biology of C. difficile and provides an in-depth discussion of the laboratory methods used for the diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI). In addition, strain typing methods for C. difficile and the evolving epidemiology of colonization and infection with this organism are discussed. Finally, considerations for diagnosing C. difficile disease in special patient populations, such as children, oncology patients, transplant patients, and patients with inflammatory bowel disease, are described. As detection of C. difficile in clinical specimens does not always equate with disease, the diagnosis of C. difficile infection continues to be a challenge for both laboratories and clinicians.

/pdf/diagnosis-of-clostridium-difficile-infection-an-ongoing-jdk6l7daow.pdf

Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile Infection: an Ongoing Conundrum for Clinicians and for Clinical Laboratories

Asymptomatic Clostridium difficile colonization is common in hospitalized patients. Existing C. difficile assay comparisons lack data on severity of diarrhea or patient outcomes, limiting the ability to interpret their results in regard to the diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI). The objective of this study was to measure how including patient presentation with the C. difficile assay result impacted assay performance to diagnose CDI. Stool specimens from 150 patients that met inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected. Nine methods to detect C. difficile in stool were evaluated. All patients were interviewed prospectively to assess diarrhea severity. We then assessed how different reference standards, with and without the inclusion of patient presentation, impact the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the assays to diagnose CDI. There were minimal changes in sensitivity; however, specificity was significantly lower for the assays Tox A/B II, C. diff Chek-60, BD GeneOhm Cdiff, Xpert C. difficile, and Illumigene C. difficile and for toxigenic culture (P was <0.01 for all except Tox A/B II from fresh stool, for which the P value was 0.016) when the reference standard was recovery of toxigenic C. difficile from stool plus the presence of clinically significant diarrhea compared to when the reference standard was having at least four assays positive while ignoring diarrhea severity. There were 15 patients whose assay result was reported as negative but subsequently found to be positive by at least four assays in the comparison. None suffered from any CDI-related adverse events. In conclusion, clinical presentation is important when interpreting C. difficile diagnostic assays.

https://digitalcommons.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3365&context=open_access_pubs

Impact of Clinical Symptoms on Interpretation of Diagnostic Assays for Clostridium difficile Infections

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) results in toxin-induced epithelial injury and marked intestinal inflammation. Fecal markers of intestinal inflammation correlate with CDI disease severity, but regulation of the inflammatory response is poorly understood. Previous studies demonstrated that C. difficile toxin TcdA activates p38 kinase in tissue culture cells and mouse ilium, resulting in interleukin-8 (IL-8) release. Here, we investigated the role of phosphorylated mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK)-activated protein kinase (MK2 kinase, pMK2), a key mediator of p38-dependent inflammation, in CDI. Exposure of cultured intestinal epithelial cells to the C. difficile toxins TcdA and TcdB resulted in p38-dependent MK2 activation. Toxin-induced IL-8 and GROα release required MK2 activity. We found that p38 and MK2 are activated in response to other actin-disrupting agents, suggesting that toxin-induced cytoskeleton disruption is the trigger for kinase-dependent cytokine response. Phosphorylated MK2 was detected in the intestines of C. difficile-infected hamsters and mice, demonstrating for the first time that the pathway is activated in infected animals. Furthermore, we found that elevated pMK2 correlated with the presence of toxigenic C. difficile among 100 patient stool samples submitted for C. difficile testing. In conclusion, we find that MK2 kinase is activated by TcdA and TcdB and regulates the expression of proinflammatory cytokines. Activation of p38-MK2 in infected animals and humans suggests that this pathway is a key driver of intestinal inflammation in patients with CDI.

https://iai.asm.org/content/iai/81/3/713.full.pdf

MAPK-activated protein kinase 2 contributes to Clostridium difficile-associated inflammation.

Chronic, culture-negative septic arthritis represents a major clinical dilemma. It often results in prolonged courses of antimicrobial therapy, which may or may not have activity against the organism responsible for the infection. It is not possible to cultivate all types of pathogens in vitro with use of traditional laboratory testing methods, but emerging techniques can be helpful to define the etiology of these infections in some cases. We describe a case of a periprosthetic joint infection in a thirty-year-old woman with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (JRA) and hypogammaglobulinemia, who developed septic arthritis after prolonged pneumonia. She received multiple courses of antimicrobial therapy without improvement of the joint symptoms. The microbiologic diagnosis was made with use of 16S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) gene amplification and sequencing from synovial fluid and tissue. The patient gave permission for this information to be submitted for publication.

A thirty-year-old woman with JRA and hypogammaglobulinemia was referred for evaluation of an infection at the site of a total knee arthroplasty. Her JRA had been managed with multiple courses of corticosteroids, infliximab, and, more recently, rituximab. She had undergone bilateral shoulder and knee synovectomy, and right elbow synovectomy, and finally had required left total knee arthroplasty in 2006.

In the fall of 2009, the patient was hospitalized because of pneumonia, which had a prolonged course, with several hospitalizations due to recurrences over two months. Chest radiographs confirmed right upper lobe pneumonia, which later progressed to bilateral pneumonia. She was treated with azithromycin and ceftriaxone and initially showed improvement, but she then had a relapse with recurrent symptoms. During the multiple relapses, she was treated with vancomycin and cefepime followed by ertapenem. She had five bronchoscopy procedures. The bronchoscopies all showed purulent secretions, but all cultures were negative, including fungal and mycobacterial cultures. Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) for Mycoplasma pneumoniae …

/pdf/mycoplasma-pneumoniae-periprosthetic-joint-infection-kq1l8bo5yg.pdf

Mycoplasma pneumoniae periprosthetic joint infection identified by 16S ribosomal RNA gene amplification and sequencing: a case report.

ABSTRACT Asymptomatic Clostridium difficile colonization is common in hospitalized patients. Existing C. difficile assay comparisons lack data on severity of diarrhea or patient outcomes, limiting the ability to interpret their results in regard to the diagnosis of C. difficile infection (CDI). The objective of this study was to measure how including patient presentation with the C. difficile assay result impacted assay performance to diagnose CDI. Stool specimens from 150 patients that met inclusion and exclusion criteria were selected. Nine methods to detect C. difficile in stool were evaluated. All patients were interviewed prospectively to assess diarrhea severity. We then assessed how different reference standards, with and without the inclusion of patient presentation, impact the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the assays to diagnose CDI. There were minimal changes in sensitivity; however, specificity was significantly lower for the assays Tox A/B II, C. diff Chek-60, BD GeneOhm Cdiff, Xpert C. difficile, and Illumigene C. difficile and for toxigenic culture (P was <0.01 for all except Tox A/B II from fresh stool, for which the P value was 0.016) when the reference standard was recovery of toxigenic C. difficile from stool plus the presence of clinically significant diarrhea compared to when the reference standard was having at least four assays positive while ignoring diarrhea severity. There were 15 patients whose assay result was reported as negative but subsequently found to be positive by at least four assays in the comparison. None suffered from any CDI-related adverse events. In conclusion, clinical presentation is important when interpreting C. difficile diagnostic assays.

Impact of clinical symptoms on interpretation of diagnostic assays for Clostridium diffic ile infections

A Clostridium difficile infection “intervention”: Change in toxin assay results in fewer C difficile infection cases without changes in patient outcomes

Zhuolin Han

Papers

Impact of Clinical Symptoms on Interpretation of Diagnostic Assays for Clostridium difficile Infections

MAPK-activated protein kinase 2 contributes to Clostridium difficile-associated inflammation.

Mycoplasma pneumoniae periprosthetic joint infection identified by 16S ribosomal RNA gene amplification and sequencing: a case report.

Impact of clinical symptoms on interpretation of diagnostic assays for Clostridium diffic ile infections

A Clostridium difficile infection “intervention”: Change in toxin assay results in fewer C difficile infection cases without changes in patient outcomes