ArticleInfection2011
Clostridium difficile infection: monoclonal or polyclonal genesis?
Article in Infection, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A molecular epidemiological and transmission analysis of Clostridioides difficile using draft whole-genome sequencing in a single hospital.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- A Review of Mixed StrainFrontiers in microbiology · 2019Review
- Prevalence of binary toxin positive Clostridium difficile in diarrhoeal humans in the absence of epidemic ribotype 027.PloS one · 2017Article
- Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile: real-time PCR detection of toxin genes in faecal samples is more sensitive compared to toxigenic culture.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2015Article
- Detection of mixed populations of Clostridium difficile from symptomatic patients using capillary-based polymerase chain reaction ribotyping.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2013Article
- Hospital-acquired Clostridium difficile infection: determinants for severe disease.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clostridium difficile is considered to be a leading cause of hospital-acquired diarrhea. C. difficile (CDI) infection shows a high rate of recurrence. There would have to be a predominantly monoclonal mechanism of CDI within individual patients in order for molecular epidemiologic tools such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ribotyping to be useful in outbreak investigation or differentiation between infection relapse versus re-infection. It was the aim of our study to determine whether CDI is of monoclonal or of polyclonal genesis. Between December 2009 and June 2010, 11 patients with nosocomial CDI were chosen arbitrarily. Five individual colonies of C. difficile were picked from each of the primary culture plates. Of 55 isolates gained, 47 were available for PCR ribotyping (eight isolates failed attempts to re-culture). Among these 47 isolates, eight different PCR ribotypes were identified. Only one of the 11 patients had a stool sample that yielded more than one ribotype (PCR ribotypes 438 and 232); this 67-year-old female cancer patient was already suffering from recurring diarrhea prior to the fatal episode of colitis which was subsequently investigated. We conclude that polyclonal infections may occasionally occur in patients with CDI. Our findings of predominantly monoclonal origin of CDI within patients suggest that molecular epidemiologic investigations can be used reliably for outbreak investigations or discrimination between relapse and re-infection.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21826436What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.