ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2014
Comparison of ChromID agar and Clostridium difficile selective agar for effective isolation of C. difficile from stool specimens.
Article in Annals of laboratory medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative evaluation of the STANDARD M10 and XpertJournal of clinical microbiology · 2024Article
- Laboratory Diagnosis ofAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2019Article
- New Insights intoFrontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Clinical application of a multiplex genetic pathogen detection system remaps the aetiology of diarrhoeal infections in Shanghai.Gut pathogens · 2018Article
- A Decade of Development of Chromogenic Culture Media for Clinical Microbiology in an Era of Molecular Diagnostics.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2017Review
- Evaluation of Xpert C. difficile, BD MAX Cdiff, IMDx C. difficile for Abbott m2000, and Illumigene C. difficile Assays for Direct Detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile in Stool Specimens.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2016Article
- Performance of chromID Clostridium difficile agar compared with BBL C. difficile selective agar for detection of C. difficile in stool specimens.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChromID Clostridium difficile agar (IDCd; bioMérieux SA, France) is a recently developed chromogenic medium for rapid and specific isolation of C. difficile. We compared the performance of IDCd with that of Clostridium difficile Selective Agar (CDSA).
methodsA total of 530 fresh stool specimens were collected from patients with clinical signs compatible with C. difficile infection, and cultures for C. difficile were performed on IDCd and CDSA. C. difficile colonies were identified by spore staining, odor, use of an ANI identification test kit (bioMérieux SA), and multiplex PCR for tcdA, tcdB, and tpi.
resultsThe concordance rate between IDCd and CDSA was 90.6% (480/530). The positivity rates on IDCd on days 1 and 2 (55.6% and 85.0%, respectively) were significantly higher than those on CDSA (19.4% and 75.6%, respectively) (P<0.001 for day 1 and P=0.02 for day 2), but the detection rates on IDCd and CDSA on day 3 were not different (89.4% vs. 82.8%, P=0.0914). On day 3, the recovery rates for non-C. difficile isolates on IDCd and CDSA were 30.2% (160/530) and 22.1% (117/530), respectively (P=0.0075). Clostridium spp. other than C. difficile were the most prevalent non-C. difficile isolates on both media.
conclusionsThe culture positivity rates on IDCd and CDSA were not different on day 3 but IDCd may allow for rapid and sensitive detection of C. difficile within 2 days of cultivation.
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.