Is Three Company or a Crowd? Comparing and Contrasting U.S. and European <i>Clostridioides</i><i>difficile</i> Clinical Practice Guidelines

• Published in: Antibiotics
• Main Authors: Jordan Jones, Aditya Pradhan, Morgan E. Pizzuti, Christopher M. Bland, P. Brandon Bookstaver
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: MDPI AG 2022-09-01
• Subjects: <i>Clostridioides difficile</i>; guidelines; ACG; ESCMID; IDSA; fidaxomicin
• Online Access: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-6382/11/9/1247

In 2021, the American College of Gastroenterology (ACG), the Infectious Diseases Society of America in conjunction with the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (IDSA/SHEA), and the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) published updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the management of <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infections. The differences, sometimes subtle, between these guideline recommendations have caused some debate among clinicians. This paper delves into select key recommendations from each respective CPG and analyzes the differences and evidence associated with each. One primary difference between the CPGs is the preference given to fidaxomicin over vancomycin for initial treatment in non-severe and severe disease endorsed by IDSA/SHEA and ESCMID guidelines, while the ACG-sponsored CPGs do not offer a preference. The emphasis on cost effective data was also a noticeable difference between the CPGs and thus interpretation of the available evidence. When using guidelines to help support local practice or institutional treatment pathways, clinicians should carefully balance CPG recommendations with local patient populations and feasibility of implementation, especially when multiple guidelines for the same disease state exist.