Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34562233›Full record

ArticleBrazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology]2021

Evaluation of an immunochromatographic test for the detection of glutamate dehydrogenase for the diagnosis of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection in dogs.

Carolina Pantuzza Ramos, Amanda Nádia Diniz, Suzana Martins Leite, Francisco Carlos Faria Lobato, Silvia Trindade Pereira, Mário Cesar Rennó, Eliane de Oliveira Ferreira, Rodrigo Otávio Silveira Silva

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology], 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 46% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Carolina Pantuzza RamosVeterinary School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Antônio Carlos Avenue, 6627, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31.270-901, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2792-058X
Amanda Nádia DinizVeterinary School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Antônio Carlos Avenue, 6627, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31.270-901, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5287-5779
Suzana Martins LeiteIMPG, Depto. de Microbiologia Médica, Universidade Federal Do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8209-2038
Francisco Carlos Faria LobatoVeterinary School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Antônio Carlos Avenue, 6627, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31.270-901, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0656-1285
Silvia Trindade PereiraClínica Veterinária MedVet, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9625-6286
Mário Cesar RennóClínica Veterinária VetMaster, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9864-8689
Eliane de Oliveira FerreiraIMPG, Depto. de Microbiologia Médica, Universidade Federal Do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9977-6460
Rodrigo Otávio Silveira SilvaVeterinary School, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Antônio Carlos Avenue, 6627, Belo Horizonte, MG, 31.270-901, Brazil. rodrigo.otaviosilva@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0074-2488
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BRUniversidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRFundação de Estudo e Pesquisa em Medicina Veterinária e Zootecnia · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate an immunochromatographic test used to detect glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) for the diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in dogs. Fecal samples of 119 diarrheic dogs were subjected to toxigenic culture as the "gold standard" method and to GDH detection (Ecodiagnostica, Brazil). Samples positive for toxigenic C. difficile strains and those positive in the GDH test were also subjected to A/B toxin detection using an enzyme immunoassay kit (C. difficile Tox A/B II, Techlab Inc., USA). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively) were measured for GDH detection and compared with the toxigenic culture results. A total of 19 (15.9%) dogs were positive for toxigenic C. difficile. Of these, 10 (52.6%) dogs were positive for A/B toxins using the enzyme immunoassay kit and 18 (15.2%) were positive in the GDH test, leading to a sensitivity and NPV of 89.4% and 97.9%, respectively. Three animals, two of which were colonized with non-toxigenic strains, were positive for GDH, though not confirmed with CDI, resulting in a high specificity (97%) and PPV (85%). The results suggest that the lateral flow test for GDH detection could be a useful method for diagnosing CDI in dogs, similar to that previously described for humans and other animal species.

Indexed as

Clostridium InfectionsAnimalsBacterial ProteinsBacterial ToxinsClostridioides difficileDogsEnterotoxinsFecesGlutamate DehydrogenaseImmunoassaySensitivity and SpecificityBacterial ProteinsBacterial ToxinsEnterotoxinsGlutamate DehydrogenaseCanineColitisDysbiosisHemorrhagicNosocomial diarrhea

Identifiers

PMID34562233
PMCPMC8578347
OpenAlexW3199378984

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.