Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Similar Outcomes of IBD Inpatients with Clostridium difficile Infection Detected by ELISA or PCR Assay

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Digestive Diseases and Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

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

  1. 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Issa M, Vijayapal A, Graham MB, et al. Impact of Clostridium difficile on inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;5:345–351.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bignardi GE. Risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection. J Hosp Infect. 1998;40:1–15.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Issa M, Ananthakrishnan AN, Binion DG. Clostridium difficile and inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2008;14:1432–1442.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bartlett JG, Gerding DN. Clinical recognition and diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2008;46:S12–S18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hookman P, Barkin JS. Clostridium difficile associated infection, diarrhea and colitis. World J Gastroenterol. 2009;15:1554–1580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yinghong Wang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints 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

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10620-013-2641-x

Keywords

Navigation