Inflammatory bowel disease and Clostridium difficile infection: contrasting views of international clinical professionals

Andreas Stallmach; Veli-Jukka Anttila; Markus Hell; Simon Gwynn; Paloma Merino-Amador; Nicola Petrosillo; Zdenek Ráčil; Tim Warren; Christoph Wenisch; Mark Wilcox

doi:10.1055/s-0044-100045

Zeitschrift für Gastroenterologie, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Z Gastroenterol 2018; 56(07): 731-737
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-100045

Originalarbeit

Inflammatory bowel disease and Clostridium difficile infection: contrasting views of international clinical professionals

Chronisch-entzündliche Darmerkrankung und Clostridium difficile Infektionen: unterschiedliche Ansichten in unterschiedlichen Schwerpunkten

Autor*innen

Andreas Stallmach

¹Department of Internal Medicine IV (Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Infectious Diseases), University Hospital Jena, Friedrich Schiller University, Jena, Germany
Veli-Jukka Anttila

²Helsinki University Hospital, Helsinki, Finland
Markus Hell

³Department of Clinical Microbiology and Infection Control, MEDILAB–Academic Teaching Laboratories, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria
Simon Gwynn

⁴Triducive Ltd, Tunbridge Wells, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Paloma Merino-Amador

⁵Hospital Clinico Universitario San Carlos, Madrid, Spain
Nicola Petrosillo

⁶National Institute for Infectious Diseases “Lazzaro Spallanzani”, Rome, Italy
Zdenek Ráčil

⁷University Hospital Brno and Masaryk, Brno, Czech Republic
Tim Warren

⁴Triducive Ltd, Tunbridge Wells, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Christoph Wenisch

⁸Sozialmedizinisches Zentrum Sud Kaiser-Franz-Josef-Spital, Wien, Austria
Mark Wilcox

⁹Leeds Teaching Hospitals & University of Leeds, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Abstract

Introduction In patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a risk factor for both morbidity and mortality. Currently, appropriate management is unclear. Guidance on best practice in the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in IBD patients is therefore needed.

Methods A multidisciplinary group of clinicians involved in the treatment of patients with IBD and CDI developed 27 consensus statements. Respondents were asked to rate their agreement with each statement using a 4-point Likert scale. A modified Delphi methodology was used to review responses of 442 physicians from different specialties (including infectious disease specialists [n = 104], microbiologists [n = 95], and gastroenterologists [n = 73]). A threshold of 75 % agreement was predefined as consensus.

Results Consensus was achieved for 17 of the 27 statements. Unprompted recognition of risk factors for CDI was low. Intensification of immunosuppressive therapy in the absence of clinical improvement was controversial. Clear definitions of treatment failure of antibiotic therapy in CDI and recurrence of CDI in IBD are needed. Respondents require further clarity regarding the place of fecal microbiota transplantation in CDI patients with IBD. Differences were observed between the perceptions of microbiologists and gastroenterologists, as well as between countries.

Conclusions Different perceptions both between specialties and geographical locations complicate the development of an internationally accepted algorithm for the diagnosis and treatment of CDI in patients with IBD. This study highlights the need for future studies in this area.

Zusammenfassung

Einleitung Bei Patienten mit chronisch-entzündlichen Darmerkrankungen (CED) stellt die Clostridium difficile Infektion (CDI) ein Risikofaktor für eine erhöhte Morbidität und Mortalität da. Ein international akzeptierter Konsensus zur Diagnostik und Therapie dieser Komplikation ist nicht etabliert.

Methoden Eine interdisziplinäre Gruppe von Experten, entwickelten in zwei Konsensuskonferenzen 27 Aussagen zur Diagnostik und Therapie der CDI bei Patienten mit CED. In einem modifizierten Delphi-Prozess wurden 442 Ärzte aus unterschiedlichen Schwerpunkten (u. a. Infektiologen [n = 104], Mikrobiologen [n = 95], Gastroenterologen [n = 73]) befragt, um ihre Zustimmung oder Ablehnung zu jeder Aussage in einer 4-Punkt-Likert-Skala auszudrücken. Ein Schwellenwert von 75 % wurde als Konsens vordefiniert.

Ergebnisse Für 17 der 27 Aussagen konnte ein Konsens erreicht werden. Unklar bleibt, welche Risikofaktoren eine CDI bedingen. Kontrovers wird die Frage der Intensivierung einer immunsuppressiven Therapie bei fehlender klinischer Besserung gesehen. Auch besteht ein großer Bedarf, wie das Therapieversagen einer antibiotischen Therapie bei CDI bzw. ein Rezidiv der CDI bei CED definiert werden kann. Zur Bedeutung des fäkalen Mikrobiomtransfers bei CDI und CED gab es keinen allgemeinen Konsens. Es zeigten sich zu einigen Aussagen auch deutliche Unterschiede zwischen Mikrobiologen und Gastroenterologen sowie zwischen den Ländern.

Schlussfolgerung Unterschiede in der Bewertung erschweren die Entwicklung eines international akzeptierten Algorithmus zur Diagnostik und Therapie der CDI bei Patienten mit CED. Diese Studie zeigt die Defizite und Schwierigkeiten in der Diagnostik und Therapie der CDI bei CED auf und formuliert den Bedarf für zukünftige Studien.

Schlüsselwörter

Chronisch-entzündliche Darmerkrankung - Clostridium difficile Infektionen - Konsensbericht

Key words

inflammatory bowel disease - clostridium difficile infection - consensus report

Volltext

Referenzen

References
1 Lessa FC, Mu Y, Bamberg WM. et al. Burden of Clostridium difficile infection in the United States. N Engl J Med 2015; 372: 825-834
2 Leffler DA, Lamont JT. Clostridium difficile infection. N Engl J Med 2015; 373: 287-288
3 Kato H, Kita H, Karasawa T. et al. Colonisation and transmission of Clostridium difficile in healthy individuals examined by PCR ribotyping and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis. J Med Microbiol 2001; 50: 720-727
4 McFarland LV, Mulligan ME, Kwok RY. et al. Nosocomial acquisition of Clostridium difficile infection. N Engl J Med 1989; 320: 204-210
5 Johnson S, Clabots CR, Linn FV. et al. Nosocomial Clostridium difficile colonisation and disease. Lancet 1990; 336: 97-100
6 Rodemann JF, Dubberke ER, Reske KA. et al. Incidence of Clostridium difficile infection in inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5: 339-344
7 Issa M, Vijayapal A, Graham MB. et al. Impact of Clostridium difficile on inflammatory bowel disease. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2007; 5: 345-351
8 Nguyen GC, Kaplan GG, Harris ML. et al. A national survey of the prevalence and impact of Clostridium difficile infection among hospitalised inflammatory bowel disease patients. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 1443-1450
9 Ananthakrishnan AN, McGinley EL, Binion DG. Excess hospitalisation burden associated with Clostridium difficile in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Gut 2008; 57: 205-210
10 Ricciardi R, Ogilvie JWJ, Roberts PL. et al. Epidemiology of Clostridium difficile colitis in hospitalised patients with inflammatory bowel diseases. Dis Colon Rectum 2009; 52: 40-45
11 Jen MH, Saxena S, Bottle A. et al. Increased health burden associated with Clostridium difficile diarrhoea in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2011; 33: 1322-1331
12 Takahashi M, Mori N, Bito S. Multi-institution case-control and cohort study of risk factors for the development and mortality of Clostridium difficile infections in Japan. BMJ Open 2014; 4: e005665
13 Anderson A, Click B, Ramos-Rivers C. et al. Lasting impact of Clostridium difficile infection in inflammatory bowel disease: a propensity score matched analysis. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2017; 23: 2180-2188
14 Trnka YM, LaMont JT. Association of Clostridium difficile toxin with symptomatic relapse of chronic inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology 1981; 80: 693-696
15 Ott C, Girlich C, Klebl F. et al. Low risk of Clostridium difficile infections in hospitalized patients with inflammatory bowel disease in a German tertiary referral center. Digestion 2011; 84: 187-192
16 Hourigan SK, Oliva-Hemker M, Hutfless S. The prevalence of Clostridium difficile infection in pediatric and adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Dig Dis Sci 2014; 59: 2222-2227
17 Razik R, Rumman A, Bahreini Z. et al. Recurrence of Clostridium difficile infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: the RECIDIVISM Study. Am J Gastroenterol 2016; 111: 1141-1146
18 Rahier JF, Magro F, Abreu C. et al. Second European evidence-based consensus on the prevention, diagnosis and management of opportunistic infections in inflammatory bowel disease. J Crohns Colitis 2014; 8: 443-468
19 Dignass A, Preiss JC, Aust DE. et al. [Updated German guideline on diagnosis and treatment of ulcerative colitis, 2011]. Z Gastroenterol 2011; 49: 1276-1341
20 Hagel S, Epple HJ, Feurle GE. et al. [S2k-guideline gastrointestinal infectious diseases and Whipple’s disease]. Z Gastroenterol 2015; 53: 418-459
21 Debast S, Bauer M, Kuijper E. European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases: update of the treatment guidance document for Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Microbiol Infect 2014; 20: 1-26
22 Surawicz CM, Brandt LJ, Binion DG. et al. Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of Clostridium difficile infections. Am J Gastroenterol 2013; 108: 478-498
23 Goyal H, Singla U. Infectious Diseases Society of America or American College of Gastroenterology guidelines for treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: which one to follow?. Am J Med 2015; 128: e17
24 Rodriguez-Martin C, Serrano-Morte A, Sanchez-Munoz LA. et al. Identifying gaps between guidelines and clinical practice in Clostridium difficile infection. Rev Calid Asist 2016; 31: 152-158
25 Curtin BF, Zarbalian Y, Flasar MH. et al. Clostridium difficile-associated disease: adherence with current guidelines at a tertiary medical center. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: 8647-8651
26 Powell C. The Delphi technique: myths and realities. J Adv Nurs 2003; 41: 376-382
27 von der Gracht HA. Consensus measurement in Delphi studies: review and implications for future quality assurance. Technol Forecast Soc Change 2012; 79: 1525-1536
28 Murphy MK, Black NA, Lamping DL. et al. Consensus development methods, and their use in clinical guideline development. Health Technol Assess 1998; 2: i–iv-1–88
29 Nitzan O, Elias M, Chazan B. et al. Clostridium difficile and inflammatory bowel disease: role in pathogenesis and implications in treatment. World J Gastroenterol 2013; 19: 7577-7585
30 Chen S, Gu H, Sun C. et al. Rapid detection of Clostridium difficile toxins and laboratory diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infections. Infection 2017; 45: 255-262
31 Crobach MJT, Planche T, Eckert C. et al. European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases: update of the diagnostic guidance document for Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Microbiol Infect 2016; 22 (Suppl. 04) S63-S81
32 Aichinger E, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS. et al. Nonutility of repeat laboratory testing for detection of Clostridium difficile by use of PCR or enzyme immunoassay. J Clin Microbiol 2008; 46: 3795-3797
33 Deshpande A, Pasupuleti V, Patel P. et al. Repeat stool testing for Clostridium difficile using enzyme immunoassay in patients with inflammatory bowel disease increases diagnostic yield. Curr Med Res Opin 2012; 28: 1553-1560
34 Erb S, Frei R, Stranden AM. et al. Low sensitivity of fecal toxin A/B enzyme immunoassay for diagnosis of Clostridium difficile infection in immunocompromised patients. Clin Microbiol Infect 2015; 21: 998.e9-998.e15
35 Elliott B, Chang BJ, Golledge CL. et al. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhoea. Intern Med J 2007; 37: 561-568
36 Ben-Horin S, Margalit M, Bossuyt P. et al. Prevalence and clinical impact of endoscopic pseudomembranes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and Clostridium difficile infection. J Crohns Colitis 2010; 4: 194-198
37 Ben-Horin S, Margalit M, Bossuyt P. et al. Combination immunomodulator and antibiotic treatment in patients with inflammatory bowel disease and Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2009; 7: 981-987
38 Yanai H, Nguyen GC, Yun L. et al. Practice of gastroenterologists in treating flaring inflammatory bowel disease patients with Clostridium difficile: antibiotics alone or combined antibiotics/immunomodulators?. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2011; 17: 1540-1546
39 Navaneethan U, Mukewar S, Venkatesh PGK. et al. Clostridium difficile infection is associated with worse long term outcome in patients with ulcerative colitis. J Crohns Colitis 2012; 6: 330-336
40 Stallmach A, Carstens O. Role of infections in the manifestation or reactivation of inflammatory bowel diseases. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2002; 8: 213-218
41 Kelsen JR, Kim J, Latta D. et al. Recurrence rate of Clostridium difficile infection in hospitalized pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2011; 17: 50-55
42 Fischer M, Kao D, Kelly C. et al. Fecal microbiota transplantation is safe and efficacious for recurrent or refractory Clostridium difficile infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2016; 22: 2402-2409
43 Khoruts A, Rank KM, Newman KM. et al. Inflammatory bowel disease affects the outcome of fecal microbiota transplantation for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2016; 14: 1433-1438
44 Gianotti RJ, Moss AC. The use and efficacy of fecal microbiota transplantation for refractory Clostridium difficile in patients with inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2016; 22: 2704-2710