Abstract
Background
Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is known as a risk factor for exacerbation of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). CDI has been most commonly tested with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for toxins, but with a suboptimal sensitivity. Compared with conventional ELISA, the polymerase chain reaction-based assay (PCR) is a highly sensitive detection technique for C. difficile. However, its pure detection of only the DNA of toxin B may lead to over-treatment.
Aims
The purpose of this study was to compare the frequency and clinical outcomes of IBD inpatients with CDI between the PCR and ELISA assays and to assess the factors associated with CDI.
Methods
The retrospective study was performed with the IBD inpatients at Cleveland Clinic from 2009 to 2011, who were tested by either ELISA or PCR or both. Outcomes under comparison included intensive care unit transfer, length of hospital stay, requirement for gastrointestinal surgeries and all cause re-hospitalization. Multivariable analysis was performed to assess the associated factors for the combined cohorts.
Results
A total of 255 patients were included, among them 222 had ELISA test, and 103 had PCR test. Thirteen (5.9 %) patients were ELISA positive, versus 14 (13.5 %) patients who were PCR positive (P = 0.02). With comparable demographic and clinical background, clinical outcomes of the ELISA and PCR positive groups showed no significant difference. Instead, the overall percentage of C. difficile positive patients had a much higher rehospitalization rate than C. difficile negative patients (P < 0.01). Multivariable analysis identified comorbidities (P = 0.03), extra-intestinal manifestations (P = 0.03) and PPI use (P < 0.01) as the associated factors for CDI.
Conclusion
There was a greater percentage of patients tested positive by PCR compared to ELISA. The outcomes of CDI diagnosed by PCR or ELISA, however, appeared comparable. The presence of comorbidities, extra-intestinal manifestations, and the use of PPI were found to be associated with CDI.
Similar content being viewed by others
Abbreviations
- Abx:
-
Antibiotics
- CD:
-
Crohn’s disease
- CDI:
-
Clostridium difficile infection
- DM:
-
Diabetes mellitus
- CABG:
-
Coronary artery bypass graft
- CHF:
-
Congestive heart failure
- COPD:
-
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
- EIM:
-
Extra-intestinal manifestations
- ELISA:
-
Enzyme linked immunosorbent assay
- GI:
-
Gastro intestinal
- IBD:
-
Inflammatory bowel disease
- IPAA:
-
Ileo-pouch anal anastomosis
- IRA:
-
Ileorectal anastomosis
- NSAID:
-
Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
- PCR:
-
Polymerase chain reaction
- PPI:
-
Proton-pump inhibitor
- RA:
-
Rheumatoid arthritis
- UC:
-
Ulcerative colitis
References
McDonald LC, Killgore GE, Thompson A, et al. An epidemic, toxin gene-variant strain of Clostridium difficile. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2433–2441.
McDonald LC, Owings M, Jernigan DB. Clostridium difficile infection in patients discharged from US short-stay hospitals, 1996–2003. Emerg Infect Dis. 2006;12:409–415.
Pepin J, Valiquette L, Alary ME, et al. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in a region of Quebec from 1991 to 2003: a changing pattern of disease severity. CMAJ. 2004;171:466–472.
Issa M, Vijayapal A, Graham MB, et al. Impact of Clostridium difficile on inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:345–351.
Rodemann JF, Dubberke ER, Reske KA, da Seo H, Stone CD. Incidence of Clostridium difficile infection in inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:339–344.
Nguyen GC, Kaplan GG, Harris ML, Brant SR. A national survey of the prevalence and impact of Clostridium difficile infection among hospitalized inflammatory bowel disease patients. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:1443–1450.
Clayton EM, Rea MC, Shanahan F, et al. The vexed relationship between Clostridium difficile and inflammatory bowel disease: an assessment of carriage in an outpatient setting among patients in remission. Am J Gastroenterol. 2009;104:1162–1169.
Bignardi GE. Risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection. J Hosp Infect. 1998;40:1–15.
Issa M, Ananthakrishnan AN, Binion DG. Clostridium difficile and inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2008;14:1432–1442.
Bartlett JG, Gerding DN. Clinical recognition and diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:S12–S18.
Hookman P, Barkin JS. Clostridium difficile associated infection, diarrhea and colitis. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:1554–1580.
Kvach EJ, Ferguson D, Riska PF, Landry ML. Comparison of BD GeneOhm Cdiff real-time PCR assay with a two-step algorithm and a toxin A/B enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for diagnosis of toxigenic Clostridium difficile infection. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48:109–114.
Chapin KC, Dickenson RA, Wu F, Andrea SB. Comparison of five assays for detection of Clostridium difficile Toxin. J Mol Diagn. 2011;13:395–400.
Larson AM, Fung AM, Fang FC. Evaluation of tcdB real-time PCR in a three-step diagnostic algorithm for detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile. J Clin Microbiol. 2010;48:124–130.
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, Y., Atreja, A., Wu, X. et al. Similar Outcomes of IBD Inpatients with Clostridium difficile Infection Detected by ELISA or PCR Assay. Dig Dis Sci 58, 2308–2313 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-013-2641-x
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-013-2641-x