Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Recent trends in the epidemiology and treatment of C. difficile infection in children

Sammons, Julia Shakleea; Toltzis, Philipb

doi: 10.1097/MOP.0b013e32835bf6c0
INFECTIOUS DISEASES AND IMMUNIZATION: Edited by Robert S. Baltimore and Hal B. Jenson
Free

Purpose of review Clostridium difficile is the most common cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea among adults in Western countries, and is increasingly recognized as an important pathogen in children. This review provides an update on the changing epidemiology of C. difficile infection (CDI) for pediatric providers and summarizes current knowledge regarding available therapies.

Recent findings The incidence of CDI has more than doubled among adults over the past decade, with a particular rise in incidence among patients presenting from the community. CDI has also increased among children in both inpatient and outpatient settings and there is growing evidence that specific populations of children may be at highest risk. Antibiotic-based therapies remain the mainstay of treatment for CDI, but new therapies have been developed with potential future applications in children. Use of nonantibiotic-based therapies is limited in children, but their use has been studied among adults with intractable or recurrent disease.

Summary The rise in incidence of CDI over the past decade warrants increased recognition by pediatric providers. Knowledge of the pediatric populations at highest risk for infection as well as the options for therapy will improve understanding of this changing disease.

aDivision of Infectious Diseases and Department of Infection Prevention and Control, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

bDivision of Pediatric Critical Care, Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital, Cleveland, Ohio, USA

Correspondence to Philip Toltzis, MD, Division of Critical Care, Rainbow Babies and Children's Hospital, 11100 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA. Tel: +1 216 844 3310; fax: +1 216 844 5122; e-mail: philip.toltzis@uhhospitals.org

Back to Top | Article Outline

INTRODUCTION

Clostridium difficile is the most common cause of healthcare-associated diarrhea in Western countries. Its pathogenic potential was established in landmark studies in the 1970s demonstrating its strong association with antibiotic-associated pseudomembranous colitis [1]. Subsequently, it was recognized that the development of C. difficile infection (CDI) usually requires two events: contact with the organism, which was most likely to occur in the hospital or long-term care facility; and antibiotic-induced perturbation of the normal intestinal microbiota, which, when intact, prevents stable colonization of C. difficile through a phenomenon known as ‘colonization resistance’. Once C. difficile establishes its presence in the large intestine, it injures the colonic epithelium by elaborating two potent enterotoxins labeled toxin A and toxin B, without which the organism is nonpathogenic.

The past decade has witnessed a dramatic increase in the incidence of CDI in both adults and children, with an estimated annual cost to American healthcare facilities of nearly $5 billion [2]. It is thus imperative for all clinicians caring for children to be familiar with this entity. The following will review the recent epidemiological evolution of CDI, particularly in children, the risk factors for acquiring CDI in the pediatric age group, and therapeutic options.

Back to Top | Article Outline

CHANGING EPIDEMIOLOGY OF CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE INFECTION

The epidemiology of CDI has changed dramatically in recent years. Over the past decade, its incidence has more than doubled in adults and the number of CDI-related hospitalizations has increased by nearly 300%; only recently has this increase tapered [3]. A major feature of this changing epidemiology has been an increase in CDI among patients previously believed to be at low risk for the disease, specifically patients in community or outpatient settings [4,5]. This was highlighted in a recent publication from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2010, which reported that 52% of cases of CDI were present upon hospital admission, although most were determined to be in patients with recent healthcare exposure [6▪]. Still, there has been an accumulating recognition of CDI among patients without any recent healthcare contact, giving rise to new definitions that include community-associated disease [7]. Recent adult studies have reported rates of community-associated CDI around 20% of all of CDI cases [8].

Box 1

Box 1

The changing epidemiology of CDI has occurred largely in parallel to the emergence of a hypervirulent strain of C. difficile, referred to as the ‘NAP1’ strain [5,9]. The first epidemic NAP1 cases were reported from North America between 2000 and 2002 and were associated with a marked increase in morbidity and mortality among affected adults [10,11]. Since then, NAP1 has been identified throughout the world and has been linked to outbreaks in North America, Europe, and Asia [7].

Back to Top | Article Outline

Epidemiology of Clostridium difficile infection among children

Similarly to findings in adult patients, several studies have shown a rise in CDI among children [12–18]. The hypervirulent NAP1 strain has also been identified among children [19–22], isolated from 19.4% of consecutive C. difficile toxin-positive stool samples obtained from children hospitalized at two tertiary care children's hospitals [19,20]. Surveillance data for CDI in children are limited, but several studies have used large administrative databases to evaluate CDI-related hospitalizations among multicenter cohorts of hospitalized children [12,13,15,16,23]. The first of such multicenter studies was performed among 4895 hospitalized children at 22 US children's hospitals and found an increase in CDI from 2.6 to 4 cases per 1000 admissions between 2001 and 2006 [12]. Similar results were found using other large multicenter cohorts [15,16].

Several studies additionally have reported a rise in CDI among children in the community, including those presenting for outpatient evaluation of diarrhea or undergoing evaluation of previously undiagnosed gastrointestinal complaints with outpatient colonoscopy [4,14,17]. A prospective cohort study evaluating children presenting with diarrhea to a pediatric emergency department found that C. difficile was the most common bacterial pathogen identified [24]. In addition, evaluation of a cohort of 181 hospitalized children found that 25% of cases had no recent healthcare exposure and thus were community-associated [25▪]. These observations must be balanced against those of a more recent study evaluating the cause of diarrhea in children presenting to an emergency department, which found that rates of C. difficile in stool samples were similar between cases and controls, particularly among those aged less than 36 months [22]. This finding underscores the importance of testing only patients exhibiting gastrointestinal symptoms and highlights the need for further research in community-associated CDI among children.

Although mild to moderate diarrhea is the most common manifestation of CDI, complications such as toxic megacolon, sepsis, and death, while relatively rare in children, continue to be reported [26–28]. An evaluation of the epidemiology of severe CDI among a cohort of hospitalized children at two pediatric centers found that CDI-related complications, including toxic megacolon, gastrointestinal perforation, and need for surgical intervention due to CDI occurred in fewer than 2% of the cohort, although transfer to the ICU within 1–2 days of diagnosis was relatively common (17%) [20]. Outcomes related to CDI in children are poorly characterized; however, the presence of CDI has been associated with longer lengths of stay, increased hospital charges, and higher rates of in-hospital mortality among hospitalized children [16].

Back to Top | Article Outline

RISK FACTORS FOR CLOSTRIDIUM DIFFICILE INFECTION IN CHILDREN

Major risk factors for CDI include increased exposure to C. difficile spores, usually from prolonged hospital stays, alterations in the lower intestinal microbiota, and factors that decrease host defenses, such as impaired immune status [7,29]. Most authorities recognize previous antibiotic exposure as the single most important risk factor for CDI in adults and children, and nearly all antibiotics have been associated with CDI [30]. Dedicated pediatric studies evaluating risk factors for CDI in children remain limited, although the majority of studies have reported an association between both antibiotic exposure and prior hospitalization and CDI in children [25▪,31].

A more recent study evaluating risk factors for CDI among hospitalized children at a tertiary care children's hospital identified additional patient level factors, including solid organ transplantation and presence of a gastrostomy or jejunostomy tube [25▪]. Indeed, the presence of a chronic comorbid condition is common in children with CDI, likely related to the combination of frequent hospitalizations and exposure to antibiotics and immunosuppressive therapies. C. difficile is frequently isolated from children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) [16,32,33] and CDI has been associated with increased IBD disease severity and escalation of IBD-directed therapy following infection [34]. In addition, children with CDI and IBD have been found to have higher rates of CDI recurrence [34] and treatment failure [32] compared with patients with CDI but no IBD. CDI is also commonly reported among children with cancer or receiving immunosuppressive therapies [35,36]. In fact, data from a large administrative database containing a multicenter cohort of hospitalized children indicated that the rate of CDI was 15 times higher among pediatric patients with cancer compared with all other children [37].

The association between gastric acid-suppressing agents, specifically proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), and increased risk of CDI has gained recent attention following the release of a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Drug Safety Alert. Contemporaneously with this release, findings from three meta-analyses suggested that PPIs were associated with at least a two-fold increased risk of CDI among adult patients [38,39,40▪]. Although the mechanism of association is unclear, it has been shown that vegetative forms of C. difficile can survive in gastric contents with an elevated pH [41]. Few pediatric studies were included in the recent meta-analyses and existing data on the association between PPIs and risk of CDI in children are limited. An Italian study evaluating risk factors for CDI among hospitalized children with abdominal pain and diarrhea found that the use of PPIs was significantly associated with CDI after multivariable analysis [42]. Other pediatric studies have not shown an association [43]. Still, given the widespread use of PPI therapy and the compelling findings in adult patients, more judicious use of these agents by pediatricians is warranted.

Back to Top | Article Outline

THERAPEUTIC OPTIONS

Therapies for CDI can be divided into those that are antibiotic-based and those that are not. In almost all instances the effectiveness of these interventions has been tested in adults with CDI, with the results extrapolated to children.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Antibiotic-based therapies

The most strongly established antibiotic regimens for both adults and children with CDI remain oral metronidazole and oral vancomycin [7]. Oral vancomycin is not absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract, resulting in intracolonic concentrations that far exceed the minimal inhibitory concentration of C. difficile. Metronidazole is highly absorbed, with little to no drug found in feces after oral administration [44], but decades of experience have demonstrated that it is curative in most cases of CDI. Until recently, these therapies were felt to be equally effective. Indeed, the randomized, placebo controlled trial by Zar et al.[45] comparing metronidazole and vancomycin documented an equivalent cure rate in adults with mild to moderate CDI (both >90%). However, in those suffering from severe infections, the same study reported greater efficacy in vancomycin recipients (97%) compared with those assigned to metronidazole (76%; P < 0.02) [45]. Vancomycin thus has become the preferred therapy in severe CDI [7]. Concerns previously raised that vancomycin exposure was more likely than metronidazole to promote colonization by vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) [46] have not been borne out, as studies in adults indicate that both agents result in new acquisition of VRE or prolongation of pre-existing VRE colonization equally [47].

Recurrent symptoms occur in approximately 30% of adults and children with CDI who initially responded to either metronidazole or vancomycin [20,48], and multiple cycles of debilitating disease afflict approximately half of those with a first recurrence [49]. In most instances, recurrent CDI is due to retained spores which are largely resistant to antibiotic effects, which then germinate to the active vegetative state after the course of therapy is completed. In some cases recurrent symptoms result from infection by a second C. difficile strain [50]. Both mechanisms are potentiated by persistent perturbations of the resident colonic microbiota caused by exposure to the initial inciting antibiotic and worsened by further exposure to metronidazole or vancomycin. There have been no cases documented to date in which recurrence was the result of organisms resistant to either of these two drugs. Hence, most authorities recommend a second course of the original antibiotic to treat the first recurrence, unless the severity of the recurrence warrants vancomycin [7]. It has become common practice to complete the course for recurrent CDI either with taper therapy, in which the dose of medication is gradually reduced to allow restitution of the normal flora, or by pulse therapy, in which antibiotic is administered in cycles to eradicate organisms that have germinated in the absence of drug [7].

Fidaxomicin was recently introduced for the treatment of adult CDI. The drug is a macrocyclic compound that inhibits bacterial RNA polymerase [51]. Similarly to oral vancomycin, it is poorly absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract and reaches high intraluminal concentrations. Two randomized trials of CDI in adults indicate that the cure rate is noninferior to vancomycin [52,53▪]. The rate of recurrence after a course of fidaxomicin, however, is approximately half that seen with vancomycin [52,53▪], presumably due to the relatively mild effect of the drug on the resident colonic microbiota [51]. The drug is not yet licensed for use in pediatrics, but early trials examining kinetics and safety in children are underway.

Other drugs have been studied in CDI but evidence of their efficacy is less compelling. Nitazoxanide, a thiazolide with broad antibacterial and some antiparasitic activity, is familiar to pediatricians as an option for treating giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis. Studies in CDI have indicated that nitazoxanide results in a cure rate equivalent to metronidazole and vancomycin [54]. These studies have included small numbers of participants, and the role of nitazoxanide in CDI remains uncertain. Rifaximin is a rifamycin compound with activity against C. difficile that reaches high concentrations in the colonic lumen. Like other rifamycins, exposure of C. difficile to rifaximin may result in the rapid emergence of organisms with high-level resistance [55]. Two additional compounds with activity against Gram-positive bacteria, bacitracin and fusidic acid, have been offered to adults with CDI but have been similarly associated with emergence of resistant organisms [55]. Tigecycline, a glycycline with broad-spectrum activity that has been especially useful in treating highly-resistant hospital-acquired bacteria in adults, occasionally has been offered to patients with severe CDI who have failed conventional therapies [56]. The drug has not been widely used in children.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Nonantibiotic-based therapies

Given the central role that a disturbed colonic microbiota plays in the pathogenesis of CDI, there is an intrinsic logic in attempting to re-establish colonization resistance through the administration of probiotics. The data supporting this practice are scant, however, and a recent systematic review [57], as well as current C. difficile management guidelines [7], does not recommend their use. Small studies, however, have been partially supportive. The trial conducted by McFarland et al.[58], for example, randomized 124 adults with CDI to receive standard therapy with or without Saccharomyces boulardii for 4 weeks. In participants who had already experienced at least one recurrence, additional recurrent episodes were significantly reduced in the group receiving probiotics (35 vs. 65%; P = 0.04), but not in those presenting with initial CDI. A second study by many of the same authors [59] indicated that the incidence of recurrent CDI was reduced when Saccharomyces was administered with high-dose oral vancomycin; no benefit was seen when probiotics were given with lower-dose vancomycin or metronidazole.

A more radical intervention aimed at reconstituting the colonic microbiome in patients with CDI is termed ‘fecal transplantation’. In this procedure, most frequently offered to adults with severe, intractable disease, a suspension of stool from a healthy donor, usually a relative, is administered to the patient either through a gastroscope, by jejunal tube, or by enema. Gough et al.[60] recently culled the fecal transplantation experience from 27 publications and reported a cumulative response rate exceeding 90%.

There is evidence that at least some patients with severe or recurrent CDI may have poor antibody response to C. difficile enterotoxins [61]. Commercial immune globulin preparations, which frequently contain antibodies against C. difficile toxin A and toxin B, have been effective in case series including both adults and children with severe disease [62,63]. Recently, a randomized, placebo-controlled trial tested the effectiveness of a preparation of monoclonal antibodies against C. difficile toxins A and B in adults with CDI [64]. Among 200 participants, those who received the monoclonal antibody preparation experienced significantly fewer recurrences (7 vs. 25%; P < 0.001).

Back to Top | Article Outline

CONCLUSION

The rise in incidence of CDI over the past decade mandates that pediatricians remain familiar with this disease. The populations at highest risk for infection include children with prolonged healthcare exposure, especially those with inflammatory bowel disease and cancer, but CDI is occurring with increasing frequency among otherwise healthy children in the community. The most established therapies remain oral vancomycin and metronidazole.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Acknowledgements

Dr Toltzis receives grant support from the Ohio Department of Health.

Back to Top | Article Outline

Conflicts of interest

Dr Sammons reports pending research support for an investigator-initiated study through Merck.

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES AND RECOMMENDED READING

Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as:

  • ▪ of special interest
  • ▪▪ of outstanding interest

Additional references related to this topic can also be found in the Current World Literature section in this issue (pp. 157–158).

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Bartlett JG, Chang TW, Gurwith M, et al. Antibiotic-associated pseudomembranous colitis due to toxin-producing clostridia. N Engl J Med 1978; 298:531–534.
2. Dubberke ER, Olsen MA. Burden of Clostridium difficile on the healthcare system. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 55 (Suppl 2):S88–S92.
3. Lucado J, Gould C, Elixhauser A. Clostridium difficile infections (CDI) in hospital stays, 2009: Statistical Brief #124. 2011.
4. Surveillance for community-associated Clostridium difficile: Connecticut, 2006. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2008; 57:340–343.
5. Severe Clostridium difficile-associated disease in populations previously at low risk: four states, 2005. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2005; 54:1201–1205.
6▪. Vital signs: preventing Clostridium difficile infections. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2012; 61:157–162.

This study is the most recent update from the CDC regarding the incidence of CDI-related hospitalizations in the US.

7. Cohen SH, Gerding DN, Johnson S, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for Clostridium difficile infection in adults: 2010 update by the society for healthcare epidemiology of America (SHEA) and the infectious diseases society of America (IDSA). Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2010; 31:431–455.
8. Kutty PK, Woods CW, Sena AC, et al. Risk factors for and estimated incidence of community-associated Clostridium difficile infection, North Carolina, USA. Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16:197–204.
9. McDonald LC, Killgore GE, Thompson A, et al. An epidemic, toxin gene-variant strain of Clostridium difficile. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2433–2441.
10. Goorhuis A, Bakker D, Corver J, et al. Emergence of Clostridium difficile infection due to a new hypervirulent strain, polymerase chain reaction ribotype 078. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47:1162–1170.
11. Loo VG, Poirier L, Miller MA, et al. A predominantly clonal multiinstitutional outbreak of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea with high morbidity and mortality. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2442–2449.
12. Kim J, Smathers SA, Prasad P, et al. Epidemiological features of Clostridium difficile-associated disease among inpatients at children's hospitals in the United States, 2001–2006. Pediatrics 2008; 122:1266–1270.
13. Zilberberg MD, Shorr AF, Kollef MH. Increase in Clostridium difficile-related hospitalizations among infants in the United States, 2000–2005. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27:1111–1113.
14. Benson L, Song X, Campos J, Singh N. Changing epidemiology of Clostridium difficile-associated disease in children. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2007; 28:1233–1235.
15. Zilberberg MD, Tillotson GS, McDonald C. Clostridium difficile infections among hospitalized children, United States, 1997–2006. Emerg Infect Dis 2010; 16:604–609.
16. Nylund CM, Goudie A, Garza JM, et al. Clostridium difficile infection in hospitalized children in the United States. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2011; 165:451–457.
17. Baker SS, Faden H, Sayej W, et al. Increasing incidence of community-associated atypical Clostridium difficile disease in children. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 2010; 49:644–647.
18. Chen KT, Stephens DJ, Anderson E, et al. Clostridium difficile infection in the pediatric surgery population. J Pediatr Surg 2012; 47:1385–1389.
19. Toltzis P, Kim J, Dul M, et al. Presence of the epidemic North American Pulsed Field type 1 Clostridium difficile strain in hospitalized children. J Pediatr 2009; 154:607–608.
20. Kim J, Shaklee JF, Smathers S, et al. Risk factors and outcomes associated with severe Clostridium difficile infection in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2012; 31:134–138.
21. Lukkarinen H, Eerola E, Ruohola A, et al. Clostridium difficile ribotype 027-associated disease in children with norovirus infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2009; 28:847–848.
22. Denno DM, Shaikh N, Stapp JR, et al. Diarrhea etiology in a pediatric emergency department: a case control study. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 55:897–904.
23. Shaklee J, Zerr DM, Elward A, et al. Improving surveillance for pediatric Clostridium difficile infection: derivation and validation of an accurate case-finding tool. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2011; 30:e38–e40.
24. Klein EJ, Boster DR, Stapp JR, et al. Diarrhea etiology in a Children's Hospital Emergency Department: a prospective cohort study. Clin Infect Dis 2006; 43:807–813.
25▪. Sandora TJ, Fung M, Flaherty K, et al. Epidemiology and risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2011; 30:580–584.

This study, performed at a tertiary care children's hospital, is the largest pediatric risk factor study for CDI to date.

26. Pokorn M, Radsel A, Cizman M, et al. Severe Clostridium difficile-associated disease in children. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2008; 27:944–946.
27. Angel CA, Green J, Swischuk L, Patel J. Severe ciprofloxacin-associated pseudomembranous colitis in an eight-year-old child. J Pediatr Surg 2004; 39:1590–1592.
28. Patel A, Gossett JJ, Benton T, et al. Fulminant Clostridium difficile toxic megacolon in a pediatric heart transplant recipient. Pediatr Transplant 2012; 16:E30–E34.
29. McFarland LV. Update on the changing epidemiology of Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 2008; 5:40–48.
30. Owens RC Jr, Donskey CJ, Gaynes RP, et al. Antimicrobial-associated risk factors for Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 46 (Suppl 1):S19–S31.
31. Morinville V, McDonald J. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea in 200 Canadian children. Can J Gastroenterol 2005; 19:497–501.
32. Mezoff E, Mann EA, Hart KW, et al. Clostridium difficile infection and treatment in the pediatric inflammatory bowel disease population. J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr 2011; 52:437–441.
33. Banaszkiewicz A, Kowalska-Duplaga K, Pytrus T, et al. Clostridium difficile infection in newly diagnosed pediatric patients with inflammatory bowel disease: prevalence and risk factors. Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18:844–848.
34. 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.
35. Castagnola E, Battaglia T, Bandettini R, et al. Clostridium difficile-associated disease in children with solid tumors. Support Care Cancer 2009; 17:321–324.
36. van de Wetering MD, Kuijpers TW, Taminiau JA, et al. Pseudomembranous and neutropenic enterocolitis in pediatric oncology patients. Support Care Cancer 2003; 11:581–586.
37. Tai E, Richardson LC, Townsend J, et al. Clostridium difficile infection among children with cancer. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2011; 30:610–612.
38. Deshpande A, Pant C, Pasupuleti V, et al. Association between proton pump inhibitor therapy and Clostridium difficile infection in a meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2012; 10:225–233.
39. Kwok CS, Arthur AK, Anibueze CI, et al. Risk of Clostridium difficile infection with acid suppressing drugs and antibiotics: meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107:1011–1019.
40▪. Janarthanan S, Ditah I, Adler DG, Ehrinpreis MN. Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea and proton pump inhibitor therapy: a meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107:1001–1010.

References [38,39,40▪] provide the strongest evidence to date of the association between PPIs and CDI by meta-analysis of observational studies.

41. Jump RL, Pultz MJ, Donskey CJ. Vegetative Clostridium difficile survives in room air on moist surfaces and in gastric contents with reduced acidity: a potential mechanism to explain the association between proton pump inhibitors and C. difficile-associated diarrhea? Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51:2883–2887.
42. Turco R, Martinelli M, Miele E, et al. Proton pump inhibitors as a risk factor for paediatric Clostridium difficile infection. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 31:754–759.
43. Rexach CE, Tang-Feldman YJ, Cantrell MC, Cohen SH. Epidemiologic surveillance of Clostridium difficile diarrhea in a freestanding pediatric hospital and a pediatric hospital at a university medical center. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2006; 56:109–114.
44. Johnson S, Homann SR, Bettin KM, et al. Treatment of asymptomatic Clostridium difficile carriers (fecal excretors) with vancomycin or metronidazole. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117:297–302.
45. Zar FA, Bakkanagari SR, Moorthi KM, Davis MB. A comparison of vancomycin and metronidazole for the treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea, stratified by disease severity. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 45:302–307.
46. Recommendations for preventing the spread of vancomycin resistance. Recommendations of the Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC). Morb Mort Wkly Rep 1995; 44:1–13.
47. Al-Nassir WN, Sethi AK, Li Y, et al. Both oral metronidazole and oral vancomycin promote persistent overgrowth of vancomycin-resistant enterococci during treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated disease. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52:2403–2406.
48. Aslam S, Hamill RJ, Musher DM. Treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated disease: old therapies and new strategies. Lancet Infect Dis 2005; 5:549–557.
49. Johnson S. Recurrent Clostridium difficile infection: a review of risk factors, treatments, and outcomes. J Infect 2009; 58:403–410.
50. Kamboj M, Khosa P, Kaltsas A, et al. Relapse versus reinfection: surveillance of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 53:1003–1006.
51. Venugopal AA, Johnson S. Fidaxomicin: a novel macrocyclic antibiotic approved for treatment of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 54:568–574.
52. Cornely OA, Crook DW, Esposito R, et al. Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for infection with Clostridium difficile in Europe, Canada, and the USA: a double-blind, noninferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2012; 12:281–289.
53▪. Louie TJ, Miller MA, Mullane KM, et al. Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection. N Engl J Med 2011; 364:422–431.

This study, along with that in reference [52], established fidaxomicin as a highly promising agent for CDI in adults.

54. Musher DM, Logan N, Bressler AM, et al. Nitazoxanide versus vancomycin in Clostridium difficile infection: a randomized, double-blind study. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:e41–e46.
55. Venugopal AA, Johnson S. Current state of Clostridium difficile treatment options. Clin Infect Dis 2012; 55 (Suppl 2):S71–S76.
56. Herpers BL, Vlaminckx B, Burkhardt O, et al. Intravenous tigecycline as adjunctive or alternative therapy for severe refractory Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 48:1732–1735.
57. Dendukuri N, Costa V, McGregor M, Brophy JM. Probiotic therapy for the prevention and treatment of Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea: a systematic review. CMAJ 2005; 173:167–170.
58. McFarland LV, Surawicz CM, Greenberg RN, et al. A randomized placebo-controlled trial of Saccharomyces boulardii in combination with standard antibiotics for Clostridium difficile disease. JAMA 1994; 271:1913–1918.
59. Surawicz CM, McFarland LV, Greenberg RN, et al. The search for a better treatment for recurrent Clostridium difficile disease: use of high-dose vancomycin combined with Saccharomyces boulardii. Clin Infect Dis 2000; 31:1012–1017.
60. Gough E, Shaikh H, Manges AR. Systematic review of intestinal microbiota transplantation (fecal bacteriotherapy) for recurrent Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 53:994–1002.
61. Kyne L, Warny M, Qamar A, Kelly CP. Association between antibody response to toxin A and protection against recurrent Clostridium difficile diarrhoea. Lancet 2001; 357:189–193.
62. Leung DY, Kelly CP, Boguniewicz M, et al. Treatment with intravenously administered gamma globulin of chronic relapsing colitis induced by Clostridium difficile toxin. J Pediatr 1991; 118:633–637.
63. Salcedo J, Keates S, Pothoulakis C, et al. Intravenous immunoglobulin therapy for severe Clostridium difficile colitis. Gut 1997; 41:366–370.
64. Lowy I, Molrine DC, Leav BA, et al. Treatment with monoclonal antibodies against Clostridium difficile toxins. N Engl J Med 2010; 362:197–205.
Keywords:

Clostridium difficile; pediatrics; review

© 2013 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins