scholarly journals Significance of a polymerase chain reaction method in the detection of Clostridioides difficile

2021 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-144
Author(s):  
Jerónimo Jaqueti Aroca ◽  
Laura M. Molina Esteban ◽  
Isabel García-Arata ◽  
Jesús García-Martínez ◽  
Isabel Cano De Torres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Polymerase Chain Reaction Method ◽  
Nucleic Acid Amplification ◽  
Confirmatory Test ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Clostridioides Difficile ◽  
Toxigenic Culture ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Positive Results

Objectives. Clostridioides difficile (CD) is the most common cause of nosocomial diarrhea. Detection of CD toxin in patients’ faecal samples is the traditional rapid method for the diagnosis of CD infection. Various testing algorithms have been proposed: an initial screening test using a rapid test, and a confirmatory test (cytotoxicity neutralization assay, toxigenic culture, nucleic acid amplification test) for discordant results. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a two-step algorithm using an immunochromatographic test followed of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Material and methods. The specimens have been tested according to the following schedule: 1) Step one: All samples were tested for detection of glutamate dehydrogenase antigen (GDH) and toxin A/B using the C. diff QUIK CHEK Complete test. All GDH and toxins positive results were considered CD positives; 2) Step two: When the results were discrepant (only GDH+ or toxins+), the samples were confirmed using the PCR test BD MAX Cdiff. All PCR positive results were considered CD positives. Results. A total of 2,138 specimens were initially tested. 139 were positive for GDH and toxins. 160 discrepant results (148 GDH+ and 12 toxins+) were tested by PCR, 117 were positive (107/148 GDH+ and 10/12 toxins+). Conclusions. The implementation of a PCR method showed an increase de 117 positive results (73.1% of discrepant). Considering the sensitivity of C.diff QUIK CHEK (instructions of manufacturer), the GDH discrepant results may be false negatives, y the samples PCR and toxins positives may be real positives results.

scholarly journals Kontroversi Metode Deteksi COVID-19 di Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Mariana Wahjudi
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Nucleic Acid ◽  
Rna Virus ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Nucleic Acid Amplification ◽  
Viral Dynamics ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Serological Tests ◽  
Nucleic Acid Amplification Tests ◽  
Polymerase Chain

Abstract—The governance of COVID-19 cases in Indonesia is carried out in accordance with the WHO directions. Serological tests, often mentioned as rapid antibody tests, are used for mass screening testing while the polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR)-based tests are performed for routine confirmation of COVID-19 infection cases. PCR test is one of nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT) for detection of viral RNA. The management of the COVID-19 detection caused controversies at the beginning of pandemic period. It seems that the controversies occurred due to misperception regarding the tests, as well as misunderstanding caused by differences in individual immune responses, viral dynamics in human bodies and clinical outcomes. In response to community opinion controversies, this paper discuss the following topics, i.e. a glimpse about COVID-19, the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, viral dynamics in human body, the dynamics of human immune response to SARS-CoV-2, basic explanation about COVID-19 and SARS-CoV-2 testing, and the last part explained the occurred controversies. Keywords: Indonesia, polymerase chain reaction, rapid test, SARS-CoV-2, serology Abstrak— Penetapan pelaksanaan deteksi kasus COVID-19 di Indonesia dilaksanakan sesuai arahan WHO. Uji serologis atau rapid test antibodi digunakan untuk test atau skrining massal sedangkan untuk uji berbasis polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) digunakan untuk konfirmasi rutin kasus infeksi COVID-19. Uji molekuler secara PCR merupakan salah satu metode nucleic acid amplification tests (NAAT), untuk mendeteksi RNA virus. Penatalaksanaan deteksi Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) ini di awal masa pandemik menimbulkan berbagai kontroversi di masyarakat. Kontroversi terjadi terutama karena pemahaman yang berbeda dari masyarakat mengenai prinsip pengujian dan adanya salah pengertian akibat adanya perbedaan respon immun antar individu, dinamika virus COVID-19 dalam tubuh orang terinfeksi, dan luaran klinis pasien. Menanggapi kontroversi pendapat di masyarakat maka pada tulisan ini dibahas tentang sekilas COVID-19, karakteristik SARS-CoV-2, dinamika virus dan pembentukan antibodi dalam tubuh manusia, penjelasan prinsip pengujian COVID-19 dan SAR-CoV-2 serta ulasan tentang kontroversi yang terjadi. Kata kunci: Indonesia, polymerase chain reaction, rapid test, SARS-CoV-2, serology

scholarly journals PCR - based diagnosis to evaluate the performance of malaria reference centers

2004 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 183-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Silvia Maria Di Santi ◽  
Karin Kirchgatter ◽  
Karen Cristina Sant'Anna Brunialti ◽  
Alessandra Mota Oliveira ◽  
Sergio Roberto Santos Ferreira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Blood Smear ◽  
Plasmodium Species ◽  
Thick Blood Smear ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Positive Results ◽  
Ssrrna Gene

Although the Giemsa-stained thick blood smear (GTS) remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of malaria, molecular methods are more sensitive and specific to detect parasites and can be used at reference centers to evaluate the performance of microscopy. The description of the Plasmodium falciparum, P. vivax, P. malariae and P. ovale ssrRNA gene sequences allowed the development of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) that had been used to differentiate the four species. The objective of this study was to determine Plasmodium species through PCR in 190 positive smears from patients in order to verify the quality of diagnosis at SUCEN's Malaria Laboratory. Considering only the 131 positive results in both techniques, GTS detected 4.6% of mixed and 3.1% of P. malariae infections whereas PCR identified 19.1% and 13.8%, respectively.

scholarly journals DETEKSI CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE TOKSIGENIK MENGGUNAKAN UJI CEPAT TOKSIN DAN REAL TIME POLYMERASE CHAIN REACTION (Toxigenic Clostridium Difficile Detection Using Toxin Rapid Test and Real Time Polymerase Chain Reaction)

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 22
Author(s):  
Ika Yasma Yanti ◽  
Dalima Ari Wahono Astrawinata
Keyword(s):  
Polymerase Chain Reaction ◽  
Clostridium Difficile ◽  
Antibiotic Therapy ◽  
Real Time ◽  
Real Time Pcr ◽  
Rapid Test ◽  
Chain Reaction ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Polymerase Chain ◽  
Clostridium Difficile Associated Diarrhea

Toxigenic Clostridium difficile infection, causing a Pseudo Membrane Colitis (PMC) and Clostridium Difficile Associated Diarrhea(CDAD) has increased sharply. The largest risk factor is the use of antibiotics. The purpose of this study was to know how to determinethe prevalence and characteristics of subjects with Toxigenic Clostridium difficile and to assess the ability of the toxin rapid test comparedto real-time PCR. Ninety adult subjects with antibiotic therapy more than two (2) weeks were enrolled in this study. The results of toxinrapid test and real-time PCR were presented in a 2x2 table, statistical test used was Chi square. The prevalence of Toxigenic Clostridiumdifficile based on the toxin rapid test and by real-time PCR was 27.3% and 37.5%, respectively. There were significant differences betweenstool consistency and number of antibiotics used with the detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile. There was a relationship betweenthe duration of antibiotic therapy with the detection of Toxigenic Clostridium difficile using real-time PCR (p=0.010, RR=2.116). Thesensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, PLR and NLR rapid test against real-time PCR were 69.7%; 98.2%; 95.8%; 84.4%; 39.2 and 0.31,respectively. This study concluded that the prevalence of Clostridium difficile in RSCM was higher compared to that in Malaysia, Thailandand India; the subjects with antibiotic therapy for more than four (4) weeks had a double risk to have Toxigenic Clostridium difficilethan subjects with antibiotic therapy for less than that time (4 weeks). Thus, in this study, toxin rapid test could be used as a tool todetect Toxigenic Clostridium difficile.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document