These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of VIDAS CDAB and CDA immunoassay for the detection of Clostridium difficile in a tcdA- tcdB+ C. difficile prevalent area.
    Author: Shin BM, Lee EJ, Kuak EY, Yoo SJ.
    Journal: Anaerobe; 2009 Dec; 15(6):266-9. PubMed ID: 19772927.
    Abstract:
    Enzyme immunoassays for TcdA and/or TcdB are widely used for diagnosis of C. difficile infection. This study compared the performance of the new VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A & B assay (CDAB) with that of the existing VIDAS C. difficile Toxin A II assay (CDA) in a tcdA(-)tcdB(+) prevalent area. A total of 555 fecal samples were cultured and tested using CDAB and CDA. C. difficile was isolated in 150 samples and the concordance rate was 81.8% (454/555) between CDAB and CDA. PCR assays for tcdA and/or tcdB were used as a confirmatory test on C. difficile strains recovered from culture positive cases (n=150) and on fecal specimens in culture negative/CDAB positive or equivocal cases (n=27). The number of tcdA(+)tcdB(+), tcdA(-)tcdB(+), and tcdA(-)tcdB(-) strains on culture positive isolates (n=150) were 75 (50.0%), 41 (27.3%), and 34 (22.7%), respectively. PCR assays for tcdB gene alone in stool specimens (n=27) showed positivity in five cases. The sensitivity of VIDAS CDAB was higher than that of VIDAS CDA (65.3% vs. 29.8%), by more than 2-fold. The specificity of CDAB was almost the same as CDA (93.8% vs. 94.5%). Toxigenic culture of C. difficile isolates in culture positive/VIDAS CDAB negative cases (n=62) additionally detected 22 VIDAS CDAB positive and 9 VIDAS CDAB equivocal cases. The VIDAS CDAB assay detects more tcdA(+)tcdB(+) strains (60% vs. 45.3%) and tcdA(-)tcdB(+) strains (70.7% vs. 0%) compared with VIDAS CDA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]