Observational studyEuropean journal of pediatrics2026
Clinical impact of toxin detection in children with PCR-confirmed Clostridioides difficile infection.
Observational study in European journal of pediatrics, 2026. 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.
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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The diagnosis of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) in children is challenging due to high rates of asymptomatic colonization and the limited ability of available assays to differentiate colonization from true infection. The relative utility of polymerase chain reaction (PCR) versus stool toxin A/B detection by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) remains uncertain in pediatric practice. This study aimed to evaluate whether stool toxin A/B detection adds incremental clinical value among children with gastrointestinal multiplex PCR positivity for C. difficile toxin genes (tcdA/tcdB) by comparing risk factors, treatment decisions, and outcomes according to toxin status. This retrospective observational study included 103 pediatric patients (< 18 years) with PCR positive for C. difficile toxin genes (tcdA/tcdB) results at a tertiary children's hospital between October 2022 and April 2025. Patients were categorized into three groups: stool toxin A/B not evaluated, stool toxin A/B negative, and stool toxin A/B positive. Demographics, risk factors, clinical characteristics, laboratory findings, treatment decisions, and outcomes were compared across stool toxin A/B groups. Of the 103 patients, 26 (25.2%) had no stool toxin A/B, 63 (61.2%) were stool toxin A/B negative, and 14 (13.6%) were stool toxin A/B positive. More than half of the cohort (54.3%) received CDI treatment, with no significant difference in treatment initiation rates among stool toxin A/B groups. The risk factors-including underlying disease (e.g., malignancies, inflammatory bowel disease, and immunodeficiencies), recent hospitalization, antibiotic exposure, and proton pump inhibitor (PPI) or enteral tube use-were similarly distributed. Clinical severity, laboratory parameters, imaging findings, recurrence, complications (1.0%), ICU admission (4.9%), and mortality (3.9%) did not differ significantly between stool toxin A/B positive and negative patients. Although a statistically significant difference in diarrhea severity was observed across groups, this was driven by the toxin-not-evaluated group. Importantly, stool toxin A/B positivity did not correlate with clinical severity, underlying risk factors, laboratory abnormalities, or outcomes.
conclusionIn this pediatric cohort, stool toxin A/B detection did not provide additional clinical value beyond PCR positivity for C. difficile toxin genes (tcdA/tcdB). PCR alone, when interpreted in the context of compatible symptoms and epidemiological risk factors, may be sufficient to guide treatment decisions for suspected pediatric CDI. Given the limited incremental value of stool toxin A/B testing, optimized diagnostic algorithms and further multicenter pediatric studies are warranted. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Pediatric CDI diagnosis is complicated by high asymptomatic colonization; PCR for C. difficile toxin genes (tcdA/tcdB) is sensitive but cannot distinguish colonization from infection. • Stool toxin A/B EIAs are more specific but less sensitive, and guidelines often recommend multistep algorithms. WHAT IS NEW: • In our cohort of pediatric patients with PCR positivity for C. difficile toxin genes (tcdA/tcdB), stool toxin A/B status was not associated with clinical severity, risk factors, laboratory findings, outcomes, or treatment initiation. • When clinical features are compatible, PCR positivity for C. difficile toxin genes (tcdA/tcdB) alone may be sufficient to guide treatment, with limited incremental value of stool toxin A/B testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42144455What 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.