Characteristics and incidence of Clostridium difficile-associated disease in The Netherlands, 2005

During a 2-month period in 2005, 13 laboratories participated in a surveillance study of Clostridium difficile-associated disease (CDAD) in 17 hospitals in The Netherlands. The median incidence rate of CDAD was 16/10 000 patient admissions (2.2/10 000 patient-days) and varied from 1 to 46/10 000 patient admissions according to hospital. In total, 81 patients with CDAD were reported; 49 (61%) patients had nosocomial CDAD, and 29 (36%) patients were admitted to hospital when already suffering from diarrhoea. Two (2%) deaths were attributable to CDAD; both of these patients were admitted with severe community-onset CDAD and were aged >80 years. Among 64 toxinogenic isolates, ten (16%) belonged to PCR ribotype 027 and ten (16%) to PCR ribotype 014. Type 027 was identified in ten patients from one hospital during an unrecognised outbreak. Toxinotyping of the 64 isolates revealed the presence of six different toxinogenic types, with 41 (64%) isolates of toxinotype 0, ten (16%) isolates of toxinotype III, and nine (14%) isolates of toxinotype V. Of the 64 toxinogenic isolates, seven (11%) had a 39-bp deletion in the tcdC gene, 11 (17%) had an 18-bp deletion, and one (1%) had a deletion of c. 44 bp. Genes for binary toxin were present in 21 (33%) of the 64 toxinogenic isolates, mainly associated with toxinotypes III and V. It was concluded that the median CDAD incidence rate of 16/10 000 patient admissions in The Netherlands is considerably lower than that in Canada and the USA, and that the emerging type 027 can spread unnoticed. The high proportion (36%) of CDAD cases with a community onset has important implications for future studies of the epidemiology of CDAD.     

Extra-intestinal infections caused by Clostridium difficile

The objective of this paper was to investigate the incidence of extra-intestinal infections caused by Clostridium difficile. During a 10-year period, the microbiology laboratory of our institution isolated 2034 isolates of C. difficile . Of the 2034 isolates, 21 (1.08%) were obtained from extra-intestinal sources. This represents an incidence of extra-intestinal isolation of four cases per 100 000 admissions. We were able to review the records of 17 patients for our study. The isolates in 12 patients were obtained from structures or fluids anatomically close to the colon and included the following infections: peritonitis in five cases (three primary and two secondary), intra-abdominal abscesses in three patients and abdominal wound infections in four cases. The infections in the other five patients were not in the anatomic vicinity of the colon. They included one case with a brain abscess, two episodes of bacteremia and two cases of foot infections (one chronic osteomyelitis). In all but one case, C. difficile isolation was obtained as part of a polymicrobial flora. The isolates were frequently non-toxigenic and the extra-intestinal infections occurred without concomitant diarrhea or prior anti-microbial therapy. Out of the 17 patients, eight died and nine survived. Death could not be directly attributed to C. difficile in any of the cases. The isolation of C. difficile outside the intestinal tract is very uncommon. Its clinical significance should be interpreted with caution.     

Rapid detection of Clostridium difficile toxin A in stool specimens

Objective: To evaluate a rapid (15-min) enzyme immunoassay in the format of an individual cassette (ImmunoCard toxin A, Meridian, BMD, Marne-la-Vallée, France) for the detection of Clostridium difficile toxin A in stool specimens.
Methods: We compared this new test with the cytotoxicity assay using MRC-5 cells, the ToxA test (TechLab, BioWhittaker, Fontenay-sous-bois, France) and toxigenic culture for the diagnosis of C. difficile -associated diseases (CDAD). A total of 236 stool specimens collected from 220 patients was simultaneously tested with the four methods. Discordant results were resolved by reviewing patients' clinical records.
Results: The prevalence of CDAD was 13.9%. Test sensitivities and specificities were 100% and 99% respectively for the cytotoxicity assay, 87.5% and 100% for ImmunoCard toxin A, 77.4% and 100% for the ToxA test and 100% and 98% for toxigenic culture.
Conclusions: The ImmunoCard Toxin A is a very rapid, individual and easy-to-perform test for the diagnosis of CDAD. It provides same-day results and may be useful for both guiding appropriate treatment and controlling nosocomial spread of C. difficile.     

Is Clostridium difficile-associated infection a potentially zoonotic and foodborne disease?

Clostridium difficile has received much attention in recent years because of the increased incidence and severity of nosocomial disease caused by this organism, but C. difficile-associated disease has also been reported in the community, and C. difficile is an emerging pathogen in animals. Early typing comparisons did not identify animals as an important source for human infection, but recent reports have shown a marked overlap between isolates from calves and humans, including two of the predominant outbreak types, 027 and 017. C. difficile has also been found in retail meat samples, suggesting that food could be involved in the transmission of C. difficile from animals to humans.     

Clostridium difficile infection: New insights into therapeutic options

Abstract

Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is an important cause of mortality and morbidity in healthcare settings and represents a major social and economic burden. The major virulence determinants are large clostridial toxins, toxin A (TcdA) and toxin B (TcdB), encoded within the pathogenicity locus. Traditional therapies, such as metronidazole and vancomycin, frequently lead to a vicious circle of recurrences due to their action against normal human microbiome. New disease management strategies together with the development of novel therapeutic and containment approaches are needed in order to better control outbreaks and treat patients. This article provides an overview of currently available CDI treatment options and discusses the most promising therapies under development.     

Mathematical modeling of Clostridium difficile infection

Clostridium difficile diarrhea is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitals. However, the number of cases in an outbreak is usually relatively small. This precludes many traditional statistical methods of modeling epidemics. Stochastic models are designed to deal with small numbers and are promising methods of understanding C. difficile epidemiology. This is illustrated by a reversible jump Markov chain Monte Carlo model based on the herd immunity hypothesis of C. difficile outbreaks.     

Prospective study of Clostridium difficile infections in Europe with phenotypic and genotypic characterisation of the isolates

A 2-month prospective study of Clostridium difficile infections was conducted in 38 hospitals from 14 different European countries in order to obtain an overview of the phenotypic and genotypic features of clinical isolates of C. difficile during 2005. Of 411 isolates from diarrhoeagenic patients with suspected C. difficile-associated diarrhoea (CDAD), 354 were toxigenic, of which 86 (24.3%) were toxin-variant strains. Major toxinotypes included toxinotypes 0 (n = 268), V (n = 28), VIII (n = 22) and III (n = 25). MICs of metronidazole, vancomycin, erythromycin, clindamycin, moxifloxacin and tetracycline were determined using the Etest method. All the toxigenic strains were fully-susceptible to metronidazole and vancomycin. Resistance to erythromycin, clindamycin, tetracycline and moxifloxacin was found in 44.4%, 46.1%, 9.2% and 37.5% of the isolates, respectively. Sixty-six different PCR ribotypes were characterised, with the 027 epidemic strain accounting for 6.2% of isolates. This strain was positive for binary toxin genes, had an 18-bp deletion in the tcdC gene, and was resistant to both erythromycin and moxifloxacin. The mean incidence of CDAD was 2.45 cases/10 000 patient-days, but this figure varied widely among the participating hospitals. Patients infected with the 027 strain were more likely to have a severe disease (OR 3.29, 95% CI 1.19-9.16, p 0.008) and to have been specifically treated with metronidazole or vancomycin (OR 7.46, 95% CI 1.02-154, p 0.02). Ongoing epidemiological surveillance of cases of CDAD, with periodic characterisation of the strains involved, is required to detect clustering of cases in time and space and to monitor the emergence of specific highly virulent clones.     

The pathogenicity of Clostridium difficile

It is now well established that the major virulence factors of C. difficile are the two toxins A and B. However, the organism possesses an array of other putative virulence factors that may be important for localisation within the colon, and in evasion of the immune system. It has been observed that certain types of C. difficile are more commonly found causing disease than others, and this seems to be independent of toxin production. Is this simply a reflection of their abundance in the hospital environment, or is it due to their virulence determinants? This review covers our current knowledge of the modes of action of toxins A and B at the cellular and molecular level. Many unanswered questions are posed that require answers before we can fully understand the pathogenic mechanisms of the organism and be in a position to manage better the spectrum of diseases it causes.     

Typing of Clostridium difficile

Clostridium difficile is primarily recognised as a nosocomially acquired pathogen manifesting in gastrointestinal disease subsequent to the patient receiving broad-spectrum antibiotics. Infection can be sporadic, but outbreaks commonly occur within a ward or hospital as a result of cross-infection. Since the 1980s, the epidemiology of C. difficile disease has been studied by the application of many different typing or fingerprinting methods; these, and the lessons learned, are reviewed herein.     

Laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile disease

The laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile -associated disease (CDAD) is based on culture and toxin detection in fecal specimens. Culture is performed on a commercially available selective media. C. difficile colony morphology is typical when viewed under a dissecting microscope. Definitive identification is best obtained by gas liquid chromatography. Culture is very sensitive but, when used alone without toxin testing, it leads to low specificity and misdiagnosis of CDAD when high rates of asymptomatic carriage exist. Toxin detection by a tissue culture cytotoxin assay followed by neutralisation with specific antiserum is often considered the standard. However, this approach lacks sensitivity and has not detected up to 30% of patients with confirmed CDAD. Multiple enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) have been introduced by various manufacturers for the detection of toxin A alone or for both toxins A and B. Some of these are designed to give results in less than 1 h. Comparative studies of EIA kits reported that the sensitivity and specificity are slightly lower than cytotoxin assays. Toxigenic culture tests C. difficile isolates for toxin production: colonies isolated on selective media are tested for in-vitro toxin production either by a cytotoxicity assay or by direct EIA. It has higher sensitivity than the cytotoxicity assay and equivalent specificity. In the routine laboratory, culture and toxin detection should be performed on every specimen and, in culture-positive and fecal toxin-negative cases, toxigenic cultures should be performed on isolated colonies.     

Comparison of testing approaches for Clostridium difficile infection at a large community hospital

Multiple diagnostic approaches are available for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI); current guidelines support two-step testing (2ST) as the preferred approach. We retrospectively evaluated the impact of switching from toxin enzyme immunoassay (EIA) to 2ST, and then to polymerase chain reaction (PCR), on CDI rates, test utilization and CDI treatment at a 900-bed tertiary care community teaching hospital. All inpatients tested for CDI between December 2008 and February 2011 were included. A positive toxin EIA or PCR was diagnostic of CDI; 2ST was performed using glutamate dehydrogenase EIA, followed by PCR if positive. Repeat tests within 8 weeks on the same patient were considered part of the same testing episode. Data were collected electronically and studied in aggregate from 9725 unique inpatients tested for CDI, representing 20 836 individual tests. PCR detected 41% more patients with CDI than toxin EIA (p <0.0001), and 15% more than 2ST (p 0.02), corresponding to higher hospital-onset and community-onset CDI rates. The number of CDI tests performed per patient decreased by 48% with PCR (p <0.0001) compared with toxin EIA. For patients with CDI, time to the first positive test result was shortest with PCR. For patients without CDI, a negative PCR, but not 2ST, was associated with 22% fewer CDI treatment days, compared with toxin EIA (p <0.0001). Compared with both toxin EIA and 2ST, PCR detected more CDI patients faster and with less frequent testing, and negative PCR results were associated with less empirical CDI treatment.     

An immunochemical method for fingerprinting Clostridium difficile

The use of sodium dodecyl sulphate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis in association with electrophoretic transfer of proteins to nitrocellulose and subsequent probing with antisera appears useful as a method for fingerprinting Clostridium difficile. Thorough testing of the stability of the antigenic nature of isolates of the organism during subculture and antigen preparation has shown it to be remarkably stable both in vitro and in vivo. Minor differences in the method of antigen extraction do not markedly alter the immunoblot patterns produced. It has also been demonstrated that an individual may harbour more than one strain of the organism at any one time. Results show the possible usefulness of this technique in studying the epidemiology of diarrhoeal disease known to be associated with C. difficile. It is suggested that for any serious study several colonies should be subcultured from the primary isolation plate.     

Clostridium difficile Infection: A Comprehensive Review

Clostridium difficile is one of the most important causes of healthcare acquired diarrhea. The disease spectrum caused by C. difficile infection ranges from mild, self-limited, illness to a severe, life-threatening colitis. The incidence of C. difficile associated disease has risen dramatically over the last decade, leading to increased research interest aiming at the discovery of new virulence factors and the development of new treatment and prevention regimens. This review summarizes the pathogenesis and changing epidemiology of C. difficile associated disease, the clinical spectrum and laboratory methods to diagnose C. difficile infection, and current treatment strategies.     

Intravenous teicoplanin does not prevent Clostridium difficile associated diarrhea

A 59-year-old man with the diagnosis of endocarditis of the mitral valve due to Streptococcus mitis was treated with penicillin G, gentamicin, and later with clindamycin as inpatient for 3 weeks. Thereafter outpatient therapy with parenteral teicoplanin 3 × per week was initiated. After 17 days of teicoplanin treatment he developed severe diarrhea, and stool samples were positive for Clostridium difficile toxin. In addition to the ongoing parenteral therapy with teicoplanin, oral teicoplanin was administered. On the third day of this regimen the diarrhea and other disabling symptoms subsided, and test results for C. difficile toxin became negative. Oral teicoplanin was continued for 10 days and cleared C. difficile effectively after treatment as assessed by consecutive stool cultures (until 60 days thereafter). The parenteral administration of teicoplanin could not prevent the onset of C. difficile associated diarrhea in this patient, who previously had been treated with clindamycin. Thus, the administration of parenteral teicoplanin does not seem to be a treatment option for C. difficile associated diarrhea in patients in which oral therapy is not possible.