ArticleAnnals of laboratory medicine2014
Evaluation of a rapid membrane enzyme immunoassay for the simultaneous detection of glutamate dehydrogenase and toxin for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laboratory Diagnostic Methods forAnnals of laboratory medicine · 2021Pooled it
- Overview of current detection methods and microRNA potential inWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2023Review
- Comparative Evaluation of Three Immunoassays for the Simultaneous Detection ofMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- Rapid-format recombinant antibody-based methods for the diagnosis ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
- Clostridioides difficile laboratory diagnostic techniques: a comparative approach of rapid and molecular methods.Archives of microbiology · 2021Article
- Laboratory Tests for the Diagnosis ofClinics in colon and rectal surgery · 2020Review
- Current knowledge on the laboratory diagnosis ofWorld journal of gastroenterology · 2017Review
- Fecal Calprotectin Level Reflects the Severity of Clostridium difficile Infection.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We evaluated the new C. DIFF QUIK CHEK COMPLETE (CD COMPLETE; TechLab, USA), which is a rapid membrane enzyme immunoassay that uses a combination of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) antigen and toxin A and B detection. A total of 608 consecutive loose stool specimens collected from the patients with suspected Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) from August to December 2012 were subjected to the CD COMPLETE and VIDAS Clostridium difficile A & B (VIDAS CDAB; bioMérieux, France). Their performances were compared with a toxigenic culture as a reference. Stool specimens that were culture-negative and CD COMPLETE- or VIDAS CDAB-positive were analyzed by using an enrichment procedure. In comparison to the toxigenic cultures, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values (PPV), and negative predictive values (NPV) were 63.6%, 98.0%, 76.1%, and 96.4%, respectively, for the CD COMPLETE-toxin and 75.5%, 97.4%, 72.5%, and 97.8%, respectively, for the VIDAS CDAB. In comparison to the enriched C. difficile cultures, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV for the CD COMPLETE-GDH were 91.0%, 92.4%, 70.5%, and 98.1%, respectively. The CD COMPLETE is a reliable method for the diagnosis of CDI and provides greater sensitivity than toxin enzyme immunoassay alone. Furthermore, the CD COMPLETE-GDH has advantages over direct culture in detecting C. difficile.
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.