ArticleJournal of medical case reports2019
The role of a sequencing-based clinical intestinal screening test in patients at high-risk for Clostridium difficile and other pathogens: a case report.
Article in Journal of medical case reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundHospitalization and antibiotic treatment can put patients at high risk for Clostridium difficile infection, where a disturbance of the gut microbiome allows for Clostridium difficile proliferation and associated symptoms, including mild, moderate, or severe diarrhea. Clostridium difficile infection is challenging to treat, often recurrent, and leads to almost 30,000 annual deaths in the USA alone. Here we present a case where SmartGut™, an at-home, self-administered sequencing-based clinical intestinal screening test, was used to identify the presence of Clostridium difficile in a patient with worsening diarrhea. Identification of this pathogen and subsequent treatment led to a significant improvement in symptoms. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient is a 29-year-old white woman with a history of severe irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea, hemorrhoidectomy, and anal sphincterotomy complicated by a perianal fistula and perirectal abscesses that required extended courses of broad-spectrum antibiotics. In June 2016, she developed intermittent Clostridium difficile infections, which required continued antibiotic use. Months later she used an at-home, self-administered, intestinal microbial test, the first of which was negative for the presence of Clostridium difficile, but it detected the relative abundance of microbes associated with irritable bowel syndrome outside the healthy reference ranges. In the subsequent 2 months after the negative Clostridium difficile result, her gastrointestinal symptoms worsened dramatically. A second microbiome test resulted in a positive Clostridium difficile finding and continued abnormal microbial parameters, which led the treating physician to refer her to a gastroenterologist. Additional testing confirmed the presence of Clostridium difficile with a toxin-positive strain. She received treatment immediately and her gastrointestinal symptoms improved significantly over the next week.
conclusionsThis case report suggests that more frequent DNA testing for Clostridium difficile infections may be indicated in patients that are at high-risk for Clostridium difficile infection, especially for patients with irritable bowel syndrome, and those who undergo gastrointestinal surgery and/or an extended antibiotic treatment. This report also shows that such testing could be effectively performed using at-home, self-administered sequencing-based clinical intestinal microbial screening tests. Further research is needed to investigate whether the observations reported here extrapolate to a larger cohort of patients.
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.