Comparison of Seven Techniques for Typing International Epidemic Strains of Clostridium difficile : Restriction Endonuclease Analysis, Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis, PCR-Ribotyping, Multilocus Sequence Typing, Multilocus Variable-Number Tandem-Repeat Analysis, Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism, and Surface Layer Protein A Gene Sequence Typing
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 1 February 2008
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Society for Microbiology in Journal of Clinical Microbiology
- Vol. 46 (2) , 431-437
- https://doi.org/10.1128/jcm.01484-07
Abstract
Using 42 isolates contributed by laboratories in Canada, The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States, we compared the results of analyses done with seven Clostridium difficile typing techniques: multilocus variable-number tandem-repeat analysis (MLVA), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), surface layer protein A gene sequence typing (slpAST), PCR-ribotyping, restriction endonuclease analysis (REA), multilocus sequence typing (MLST), and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE). We assessed the discriminating ability and typeability of each technique as well as the agreement among techniques in grouping isolates by allele profile A (AP-A) through AP-F, which are defined by toxinotype, the presence of the binary toxin gene, and deletion in the tcdC gene. We found that all isolates were typeable by all techniques and that discrimination index scores for the techniques tested ranged from 0.964 to 0.631 in the following order: MLVA, REA, PFGE, slpAST, PCR-ribotyping, MLST, and AFLP. All the techniques were able to distinguish the current epidemic strain of C. difficile (BI/027/NAP1) from other strains. All of the techniques showed multiple types for AP-A (toxinotype 0, binary toxin negative, and no tcdC gene deletion). REA, slpAST, MLST, and PCR-ribotyping all included AP-B (toxinotype III, binary toxin positive, and an 18-bp deletion in tcdC) in a single group that excluded other APs. PFGE, AFLP, and MLVA grouped two, one, and two different non-AP-B isolates, respectively, with their AP-B isolates. All techniques appear to be capable of detecting outbreak strains, but only REA and MLVA showed sufficient discrimination to distinguish strains from different outbreaks.Keywords
This publication has 46 references indexed in Scilit:
- Clostridium difficilein Retail Ground Meat, CanadaEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2007
- Typing and Subtyping of Clostridium difficile Isolates by Using Multiple-Locus Variable-Number Tandem-Repeat AnalysisJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2007
- A Cautionary Tale: Lack of Consistency in Allele Sizes between Two Laboratories for a Published Multilocus Microsatellite Typing SystemJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2007
- Clostridium difficile PCR Ribotypes in Calves, CanadaEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2006
- Multilocus Variable-Number Tandem-Repeat Analysis for Investigation of Clostridium difficile Transmission in HospitalsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2006
- Molecular Analysis of Clostridium difficile PCR Ribotype 027 Isolates from Eastern and Western CanadaJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2006
- Emergence of Clostridium difficile-associated disease in North America and EuropeClinical Microbiology & Infection, 2006
- Amplified-fragment length polymorphism analysis of Propionibacterium isolates implicated in contamination of blood productsBritish Journal of Haematology, 2005
- Pulsed-Field Gel Electrophoresis Can Yield DNA Fingerprints of Degradation-Susceptible Clostridium difficile StrainsJournal of Clinical Microbiology, 2002
- Antibiotic-Associated Pseudomembranous Colitis Due to Toxin-Producing ClostridiaNew England Journal of Medicine, 1978