In 2009 the first European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) guideline for diagnosing Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) was launched. Since then newer tests for diagnosing CDI have become available, especially nucleic acid amplification tests. The main objectives of this update of the guidance document are to summarize the currently available evidence concerning laboratory diagnosis of CDI and to formulate and revise recommendations to optimize CDI testing. This update is essential to improve the diagnosis of CDI and to improve uniformity in CDI diagnosis for surveillance purposes among Europe. An electronic search for literature concerning the laboratory diagnosis of CDI was performed. Studies evaluating a commercial laboratory test compared to a reference test were also included in a meta-analysis. The commercial tests that were evaluated included enzyme immunoassays (EIAs) detecting glutamate dehydrogenase, EIAs detecting toxins A and B and nucleic acid amplification tests. Recommendations were formulated by an executive committee, and the strength of recommendations and quality of evidence were graded using the Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. No single commercial test can be used as a stand-alone test for diagnosing CDI as a result of inadequate positive predictive values at low CDI prevalence. Therefore, the use of a two-step algorithm is recommended. Samples without free toxin detected by toxins A and B EIA but with positive glutamate dehydrogenase EIA, nucleic acid amplification test or toxigenic culture results need clinical evaluation to discern CDI from asymptomatic carriage.

The aim of the present systematic review was to evaluate the available evidence on laboratory diagnosis of CDI and to formulate recommendations to optimize CDI testing. In comparison with cell culture cytotoxicity assay (CCA) and toxigenic culture (TC) of stools, we analyzed the test characteristics of 13 commercial available enzyme immunoasssays (EIA) detecting toxins A and/or B, 4 EIAs detecting Clostridium difficile glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH), and a real-time PCR for C. difficile toxin B gene. In comparison with CCA and TCA and assuming a prevalence of CDI of 5%, PPV and NPV varied between 0.28-0.77, 0.12-0.65 and 0.98-1.00, 0.97-1.00, respectively. Only if the tests were performed in a population with a CDI prevalence of 50 percent, would PPVs be acceptable (ranging from 0.71 to 1.00).To overcome the problem of a low PPV, we propose a two step approach, with a second test or a reference method in case of a positive first test. Further reducing the number of false negative results would require either retesting of all subjects with a negative first test, or re-testing all subjects with a negative second test, after an initially positive test. This approach resulted in non-significant improvements, and emphasizes the need for better diagnostic tests. Further studies to validate the applicability of two-step testing, including assessment of clinical features, are required.

is the main causative agent of antibiotic-associated and health care-associated infective diarrhea. Recently, there has been growing interest in alternative sources of other than patients with infection (CDI) and the hospital environment. Notably, the role of -colonized patients as a possible source of transmission has received attention. In this review, we present a comprehensive overview of the current understanding of colonization. Findings from gut microbiota studies yield more insights into determinants that are important for acquiring or resisting colonization and progression to CDI. In discussions on the prevalence of colonization among populations and its associated risk factors, colonized patients at hospital admission merit more attention, as findings from the literature have pointed to their role in both health care-associated transmission of and a higher risk of progression to CDI once admitted. colonization among patients at admission may have clinical implications, although further research is needed to identify if interventions are beneficial for preventing transmission or overcoming progression to CDI.

The emergence of the plasmid-mediated mcr colistin resistance gene in the community poses a potential threat for treatment of patients, especially when hospitalized. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence of all currently known mcr mediated colistin resistance gene in fecal samples of patients attending a tertiary care hospital. From November 2014 until July 2015, fecal samples of patients attending the Leiden University Medical Center were collected and screened for presence of mcr using real-time PCR. Two of 576 patients were positive for mcr-1, resulting in a prevalence of 0.35%, whereas no mcr-2 was found. One of these samples was culture negative, the second sample contained a blaCMY-2 and mcr-1 containing E.coli. This strain belonged to Sequence Type 359 and serotype O177:H21. The mcr-1 containing E.coli was phenotypically susceptible to colistin with a MIC of ≤ 0.25mg/l, due to a 1329bp transposon IS10R inserted into the mcr-1 gene as identified by WGS. This prevalence study shows that mcr-1 is present in low levels patients out of the community attending a hospital. Furthermore the study underlines the importance of phenotypical confirmation of molecular detection of a mcr-1 gene.

Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) can be challenging. First of all, there has been debate on which of the two reference assays, cell cytotoxicity neutralization assay (CCNA) or toxigenic culture (TC) should be considered the gold standard for CDI detection. Although the CCNA suffers most from suboptimal storage conditions and subsequent toxin degradation, TC is reported to falsely increase CDI detection rates as it cannot differentiate CDI patients from patients asymptomatically colonised by toxigenic C. difficile. Several rapid assays are available for CDI detection and fall into three broad categories: (1) enzyme immunoassays for glutamate dehydrogenase, (2) enzyme immunoassays for toxins A/B and (3) nucleic acid amplification tests detecting toxin genes. All three categories have their own limitations, being suboptimal specificity and/or sensitivity or the inability to discern colonised patients from CDI patients. In light of these limitations, multi-step algorithmic testing has now been advocated by international guidelines in order to optimize diagnostic accuracy. Despite these recommendations, testing methods between hospitals vary widely, which impacts CDI incidence rates. CDI incidence rates are also influenced by sample selection criteria, as several studies have shown that if not all unformed stool samples are tested for CDI, many cases may be missed due to an absence of clinical suspicion. Since methods for diagnosing CDI remain imperfect, there has been a growing interest in alternative testing strategies like faecal biomarkers, immune modulating interleukins, cytokines and imaging methods. At the moment, these alternative methods might play an adjunctive role, but they are not suitable to replace conventional CDI testing strategies.

Gut microbiota composition in patients with Clostridioides difficile colonization is not well investigated. We aimed to identify bacterial signatures associated with resistance and susceptibility to C. difficile colonization (CDC) and infection (CDI). Therefore, gut microbiota composition from patients with CDC (n = 41), with CDI (n = 41), and without CDC (controls, n = 43) was determined through 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing. Bacterial diversity was decreased in CDC and CDI patients (p < 0.01). Overall microbiota composition was significantly different between control, CDC, and CDI patients (p = 0.001). Relative abundance of Clostridioides (most likely C. difficile) increased stepwise from controls to CDC and CDI patients. In addition, differential abundance analysis revealed that CDI patients’ gut microbiota was characterized by significantly higher relative abundance of Bacteroides and Veillonella than CDC patients and controls. Control patients had significantly higher Eubacterium hallii and Fusicatenibacter abundance than colonized patients. Network analysis indicated that Fusicatenibacter was negatively associated with Clostridioides in CDI patients, while Veillonella was positively associated with Clostridioides in CDC patients. Bacterial microbiota diversity decreased in both CDC and CDI patients, but harbored a distinct microbiota. Eubacterium hallii and Fusicatenibacter may indicate resistance against C. difficile colonization and subsequent infection, while Veillonella may indicate susceptibility to colonization and infection by C. difficile.

We investigated whether the clinical criteria used in the Hestia study for selection of pulmonary embolism (PE) patients for outpatient treatment could discriminate PE patients with high and low risk for adverse clinical outcome.We performed a cohort study with PE patients who were triaged with 11 criteria for outpatient treatment. Patients not eligible for outpatient treatment were treated in hospital. Study outcomes were recurrent venous thromboembolism, major bleeding and all-cause mortality during 3 months.In total, 530 patients were included, of which 297 were treated at home. In the outpatient group, six patients (2.0%, 95% CI 0.7-4.3%) had recurrent venous thromboembolism versus nine inpatients (3.9%, 95% CI 1.9-7.0%). Three patients (1.0%, 95% CI 0.2-2.9) died during the 3-months follow-up in the outpatient group versus 22 patients (9.6%, 95% CI 6.3-14) in the in-patient group (p,0.05). None of the outpatients died as a result of fatal PE versus five (2.2%) in-patients (p,0.05). In the outpatient group, 0.7% (95% CI 0.08-2.4) had major bleeding events versus 4.8% (95% CI 2.4-8.4) of in-patients (p,0.05).This study showed that the Hestia criteria can discriminate PE patients with low risk from patients with high risk for adverse clinical outcome. The low-risk patients can safely be treated at home.

The purpose of this investigation was to study risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in an endemic setting. In a 34-month prospective case–control study, we compared the risk factors and clinical characteristics of all consecutively diagnosed hospitalised CDI patients (n = 93) with those of patients without diarrhoea (n = 76) and patients with non-CDI diarrhoea (n = 64). The incidence of CDI was 17.5 per 10,000 hospital admissions. C. difficile polymerase chain reaction (PCR) ribotype 014 was the most frequently found type (15.9%), followed by types 078 (12.7%) and 015 (7.9%). Independent risk factors for endemic CDI were the use of second-generation cephalosporins, previous hospital admission and previous stay at the intensive care unit (ICU). The use of third-generation cephalosporins was a risk factor for diarrhoea in general. We found no association of CDI with the use of fluoroquinolones or proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). The overall 30-day mortality among CDI patients, patients without diarrhoea and patients with non-CDI diarrhoea was 7.5%, 0% and 1.6%, respectively. In this endemic setting, risk factors for CDI differed from those in outbreak situations. Some risk factors that have been ascribed to CDI earlier were, in this study, not specific for CDI, but for diarrhoea in general. The 30-day mortality among CDI patients was relatively high.