ArticleJournal of clinical microbiology2012
Detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile: comparison of the cell culture neutralization, Xpert C. difficile, Xpert C. difficile/Epi, and Illumigene C. difficile assays.
Article in Journal of clinical microbiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 99 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of Clostridioides difficile infection: An official clinical practice guideline of the Spanish Society of Chemotherapy (SEQ), Spanish Society of Internal Medicine (SEMI) and the working group of Postoperative Infection of the Spanish Society of Anesthesia and Reanimation (SEDAR).Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2020Guideline
- Multiple cross displacement amplification (MCDA) for rapid detection of toxigenicMicrobiology spectrum · 2025Article
- Rapid, Point-of-Care Microwave Lysis and Electrochemical Detection ofBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparison of rectal swabs and fecal samples for the detection ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Development and evaluation of a rapid visual loop-mediated isothermal amplification assay for thePeerJ · 2024Article
- Infrequent intrahousehold transmission of Clostridioides difficile between pet owners and their pets.Zoonoses and public health · 2023Article
- Clinical characteristics associated with the severity of Clostridium [Clostridioides] difficile infection in a tertiary teaching hospital from Mexico.Biomedical journal · 2022Article
- Pragmatic Strategy for Fecal Specimen Storage and the Corresponding Test Methods forPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Correlation between antibiotic consumption and the incidence of healthcare facility-onset Clostridioides difficile infection: a retrospective chart review and analysis.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2021Article
- Evaluation of Cycle Threshold, Toxin Concentration, and Clinical Characteristics of Clostridioides difficile Infection in Patients with Discordant Diagnostic Test Results.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2020Article
- Outcomes and clinical relevance of stool multiplex bacterial polymerase chain reaction in patients with acute diarrhea: single center experience.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2020Article
- Advances in Directly Amplifying Nucleic Acids from Complex Samples.Biosensors · 2019Review
- Rapid, label-free genetic detection of enteropathogens in stool without genetic isolation or amplification.Biosensors & bioelectronics · 2019Article
- Diagnosis ofIranian journal of microbiology · 2018Article
- Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP): a versatile technique for detection of micro-organisms.Journal of applied microbiology · 2018Review
- Novel portable platform for molecular detection of toxigenic Clostridium difficile in faeces: a diagnostic accuracy study.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2017Article
- Current knowledge on the laboratory diagnosis ofWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Article
- Risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection in hemato-oncological patients: A case control study in 144 patients.Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Comparison of Multilocus Sequence Typing and the Xpert C. difficile/Epi Assay for Identification of Clostridium difficile 027/NAP1/BI.Journal of clinical microbiology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Clostridium difficile is the most important cause of nosocomial diarrhea. Several laboratory techniques are available to detect C. difficile toxins or the genes that encode them in fecal samples. We evaluated the Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi (Cepheid, CA) that detect the toxin B gene (tcdB) and tcdB, cdt, and a deletion in tcdC associated with the 027/NAP1/BI strain, respectively, by real-time PCR, and the Illumigene C. difficile (Meridian Bioscience, Inc.) that detects the toxin A gene (tcdA) by loop-mediated isothermal amplification in stool specimens. Toxigenic culture was used as the reference method for discrepant stool specimens. Two hundred prospective and fifty retrospective diarrheal stool specimens were tested simultaneously by the cell cytotoxin neutralization assay (CCNA) and the Xpert C. difficile, Xpert C. difficile/Epi, and Illumigene C. difficile assays. Of the 200 prospective stools tested, 10.5% (n = 23) were determined to be positive by CCNA, 17.5% (n = 35) were determined to be positive by Illumigene C. difficile, and 21.5% (n = 43) were determined to be positive by Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi. Of the 50 retrospective stools, previously determined to be positive by CCNA, 94% (n = 47) were determined to be positive by Illumigene C. difficile and 100% (n = 50) were determined to be positive by Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi. Of the 11 discrepant results (i.e., negative by Illumigene C. difficile but positive by Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi), all were determined to be positive by the toxigenic culture. A total of 21% of the isolates were presumptively identified by the Xpert C. difficile/Epi as the 027/NAP1/BI strain. The Xpert C. difficile and Xpert C. difficile/Epi assays were the most sensitive, rapid, and easy-to use assays for the detection of toxigenic C. difficile in stool specimens.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.