Efficacy of real-time PCR for detecting Clostridium difficile infection: comparison with enzyme-linked fluorescent spectroscopy-based approaches / 南方医科大学学报

ABSTRACT

<p><b>OBJECTIVE</b>To evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of real?time polymerase chain reaction (q?PCR) for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in comparison with routine culture and enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy?based aprroaches.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>Stool samples were collected from suspected CDI cases in General Hospital of Guangzhou Military Command of PLA between May and December in 2016. All the samples were examined with 3 methods, namely enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy for detecting Clostridium difficile toxin A/B (CDAB), detection of glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), and q?PCR for amplification of Clostridium difficile?specific gene tpi and toxin gene (tcdA/tcdB), with the results of fecal culture as the reference for evaluating the diagnostic efficacy of the 3 methods.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Of the total of 70 fecal samples, 13 (18.57%) were found to be positive for Clostridium difficile, including toxin?producing strains in 6 (8.57%) samples. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and diagnostic coincidence rate of q?PCR for tpi were 92.31%, 91.23%, 70.59%, 98.11% and 91.43%, respectively, which were significantly higher than those of GDH test (84.62%, 84.21%, 55.00%, 96.00%, and 84.29%, respectively; Χ=24.881, P<0.001). The sensitivity of q?PCR for tcdA/cdB was significantly higher than that of enzyme?linked fluorescent spectroscopy for CDAB in detecting CDI (66.67% vs 33.33%; Χ=35.918, P<0.001).</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>Both CDAB detection and q?PCR have a high specificity in detecting CDI, but GDH detection has a good sensitivity, and all these 3 methods have a high negative predictive value. Compared with other detection methods, amplification of tpi and tcdA/tcdB using q?PCR allows more rapid, sensitive and specific detection of CDI.</p>