Dataset Information

Clostridium difficile-associated Diarrhea in Developing Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The prevalence of Clostridium difficile infection is rapidly increasing worldwide, but prevalence is difficult to estimate in developing countries where awareness, diagnostic resources, and surveillance protocols are limited. As diarrhea is the hallmark symptom, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the prevalence and incidence of C. difficile infection in patients in these regions who presented with diarrhea.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature search of MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and Latin-American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature databases to identify and analyze data from recent studies providing prevalence or incidence rates of C. difficile-associated diarrhea in developing countries within four regions: Africa-Middle East, developing Asia, Latin America, and China. Our objectives were to determine the current prevalence and incidence density rates of first episodes of C. difficile-associated diarrhea in developing countries.

Results

Within the regions included in our analysis, prevalence of C. difficile infection in patients with diarrhea was 15% (95% CI 13-17%) (including community and hospitalized patients), with no significant difference across regions. The incidence of C. difficile infection in 17 studies including this information was 8.5 per 10,000 patient-days (95% CI 5.83-12.46). Prevalence was significantly higher in hospitalized patients versus community patients (p = 0.0227).

Conclusion

Our prevalence estimate of 15% is concerning; however, low awareness and inconsistent diagnostic and surveillance protocols suggest this is markedly underestimated. Enhanced awareness and management of C. difficile infection in patients with diarrhea, along with improvements in infection control and surveillance practices, should be implemented to reduce prevalence of C. difficile-associated diarrhea in developing countries.

Funding

Pfizer Inc.

SUBMITTER: Curcio D

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6374231 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRecent meta-analyses of the efficacy of probiotics for preventing diarrhea associated with Clostridium difficile have concluded there is a large effect favouring probiotics. We reexamined this evidence, which contradicts the results of a more recent large randomized controlled trial that found no benefit of Lactobacillus probiotics for preventing C. difficile-associated diarrhea.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of the efficacy of treatment with Lactobacillus probiotics for preventing nosocomial C.?difficile-associated diarrhea in adults and carried out a meta-analysis using a Bayesian hierarchical model. We used credibility analysis and meta-regression to characterize the heterogeneity between studies.ResultsTen studies met our inclusion criteria. The pooled risk ratio was highly statistically significant, at 0.25 (95% credible interval 0.08-0.47). However, the 95% prediction interval for the risk ratio in a future study, 0.02-1.34, was wider than the credible interval, owing to heterogeneity between studies. Furthermore, a credibility analysis showed that the strength of the evidence was weaker than the observed number of cases of C. difficile-associated diarrhea across studies would suggest. Meta-regression suggested that the beneficial effect of probiotics was more likely to be reported in studies with an increased risk of C. difficile-associated diarrhea in the control group, although this association was not statistically significant.InterpretationAccounting for between-study heterogeneity showed that there is considerable uncertainty regarding the apparently large efficacy estimate associated with Lactobacillus probiotic treatment in preventing C. difficile-associated diarrhea. Most studies to date have been carried out in populations with a low risk of C. difficile-associated diarrhea, such that the evidence is inconclusive and inadequate to support a policy concerning routine use of probiotics in to prevent this condition.

Project description:Importance:An understanding of the incidence and outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in the United States can inform investments in prevention and treatment interventions. Objective:To quantify the incidence of CDI and its associated hospital length of stay (LOS) in the United States using a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Data Sources:MEDLINE via Ovid, Cochrane Library Databases via Wiley, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Complete via EBSCO Information Services, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched for studies published in the United States between 2000 and 2019 that evaluated CDI and its associated LOS. Study Selection:Incidence data were collected only from multicenter studies that had at least 5 sites. The LOS studies were included only if they assessed postinfection LOS or used methods accounting for time to infection using a multistate model or compared propensity score-matched patients with CDI with control patients without CDI. Long-term-care facility studies were excluded. Of the 119 full-text articles, 86 studies (72.3%) met the selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis:Two independent reviewers performed the data abstraction and quality assessment. Incidence data were pooled only when the denominators used the same units (eg, patient-days). These data were pooled by summing the number of hospital-onset CDI incident cases and the denominators across studies. Random-effects models were used to obtain pooled mean differences. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 value. Data analysis was performed in February 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures:Incidence of CDI and CDI-associated hospital LOS in the United States. Results:When the 13 studies that evaluated incidence data in patient-days due to hospital-onset CDI were pooled, the CDI incidence rate was 8.3 cases per 10 000 patient-days. Among propensity score-matched studies (16 of 20 studies), the CDI-associated mean difference in LOS (in days) between patients with and without CDI varied from 3.0 days (95% CI, 1.44-4.63 days) to 21.6 days (95% CI, 19.29-23.90 days). Conclusions and Relevance:Pooled estimates from currently available literature suggest that CDI is associated with a large burden on the health care system. However, these estimates should be interpreted with caution because higher-quality studies should be completed to guide future evaluations of CDI prevention and treatment interventions.

Project description:BackgroundClostridioides (Clostridium) difficile is an important pathogen of healthcare- associated diarrhea, however, an increase in the occurrence of C. difficile infection (CDI) outside hospital settings has been reported. The accumulation of antimicrobial resistance in C. difficile can increase the risk of CDI development and/or its spread. The limited number of antimicrobials for the treatment of CDI is matter of some concern.ObjectivesIn order to summarize the data on antimicrobial resistance to C. difficile derived from humans, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed.MethodsWe searched five bibliographic databases: (MEDLINE [PubMed], Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science) for studies that focused on antimicrobial susceptibility testing in C. difficile and were published between 1992 and 2019. The weighted pooled resistance (WPR) for each antimicrobial agent was calculated using a random- effects model.ResultsA total of 111 studies were included. The WPR for metronidazole and vancomycin was 1.0% (95% CI 0-3%) and 1% (95% CI 0-2%) for the breakpoint > 2 mg/L and 0% (95% CI 0%) for breakpoint ≥32 μg/ml. Rifampin and tigecycline had a WPRs of 37.0% (95% CI 18-58%) and 1% (95% CI 0-3%), respectively. The WPRs for the other antimicrobials were as follows: ciprofloxacin 95% (95% CI 85-100%), moxifloxacin 32% (95% CI 25-40%), clindamycin 59% (95% CI 53-65%), amoxicillin/clavulanate 0% (0-0%), piperacillin/tazobactam 0% (0-0%) and ceftriaxone 47% (95% CI 29-65%). Tetracycline had a WPR 20% (95% CI 14-27%) and meropenem showed 0% (95% CI 0-1%); resistance to fidaxomicin was reported in one isolate (0.08%).ConclusionResistance to metronidazole, vancomycin, fidaxomicin, meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam is reported rarely. From the alternative CDI drug treatments, tigecycline had a lower resistance rate than rifampin. The high-risk antimicrobials for CDI development showed a high level of resistance, the highest was seen in the second generation of fluoroquinolones and clindamycin; amoxicillin/clavulanate showed almost no resistance. Tetracycline resistance was present in one fifth of human clinical C. difficile isolates.