找回密码
 注册

微信登录,快人一步

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

公告区+ 发布

01-08 10:30
01-07 16:18
01-06 15:55
01-03 17:36
01-03 09:00
01-02 17:30
查看: 2237|回复: 1

[资料] C.diff EIA

[复制链接]
发表于 2011-11-3 17:24 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式

马上注册登录,享用更多感控资源,助你轻松入门。

您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看,没有账号?注册 |

×
Performance of the TechLab C. DIFF CHEK-60 Enzyme Immunoassay (EIA) in Combination with the C. difficile Tox A/B II EIA Kit, the Triage C. difficile Panel Immunoassay, and a Cytotoxin Assay for Diagnosis of Clostridium difficile-Associated Diarrhea
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC522321/
回复

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2011-11-11 15:57 | 显示全部楼层

Performance of TechLab C. DIFF QUIK CHEK and TechLab C. DIFFICILE TOX A/B II

Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2007 Sep;59(1):33-7. Epub 2007 Jul 26.
Performance of TechLab C. DIFF QUIK CHEK and TechLab C. DIFFICILE TOX A/B II for the detection of Clostridium difficile in stool samples.
Reyes RC, John MA, Ayotte DL, Covacich A, Milburn S, Hussain Z.
SourceDepartment of Medical Microbiology, London Health Sciences Centre, Victoria Hospital, London, Ontario, Canada N6C 6B5.

Abstract
Two membrane-bound enzyme immunoassays by TechLab, Blacksburg, VA, were evaluated and compared with the Triage Micro C. difficile Panel (Biosite Diagnostics, San Diego, CA), with culture, and with cytotoxic assay. The TechLab panels were C. DIFF QUIK CHEK (QC-GDH) and C. DIFFICILE TOX A/B II (QC-toxinA/B), which detect glutamate dehydrogenase (GDH) and Clostridium difficile toxins A and B, respectively. The Triage Panel detects GDH (TR-GDH) and toxin A (TR-toxinA).

METHODS: Stool samples were inoculated onto CCFA plates (Q-Labs, Quebec, Canada) after alcohol shock, and suspected colonies were identified by the MicroScreen C. difficile latex slide agglutination test (Microgen Bioproducts, Surrey, UK). TR-GDH, TR-toxinA, QC-GDH, and QC-toxinA/B tests were performed according to the manufacturers' instructions on all the samples. Samples positive for GDH or culture but negative for TR-toxinA and QC-toxinA/B were further tested by cytotoxin assay (CTA). CTA was also performed on samples that caused blackening of the Triage Micro C. difficile Panel.

RESULTS: A total of 313 of 401 stool samples were negative for GDH and toxins (78%). Eighty-eight samples were positive either for GDH or culture or both. Thirteen of these could not be evaluated for C. difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) because CTA test was not performed. Toxin/s was detected at least by one method in 46 (11.8%) of 388 samples that were positive for culture or GDH and were considered diagnostic of CDAD. The QC-GDH was more sensitive than culture and TR-GDH for the detection of C. difficile. However, in 18GDH-positive samples positive for either of the Triage or TechLab immunoassays, the culture remained negative. Ten (2%) results of the Triage immunoassays could not be evaluated because of discoloration of the panels. QC-GDH (93.5%) was more sensitive for detecting the presence of toxin-producing C. difficile than TR-GDH (79.5%). TR-toxinA was more specific for detecting the presence of toxin-producing C. difficile than QC-toxinA/B (100% and 96.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: The GDH tests had a faster turnaround time than the traditional culture methods. QC-GDH was most sensitive for the detection C. difficile-positive stools and was easy to use.

点评

艰难梭菌的快速、敏感的检测  发表于 2013-2-28 23:04

评分

参与人数 1金币 +2 收起 理由
桂花香 + 2 谢谢分享

查看全部评分

回复

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册 |

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表