4.5 Article

Risk factors for candidaemia: A prospective multi-centre case-control study

Journal

MYCOSES
Volume 64, Issue 3, Pages 257-263

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/myc.13211

Keywords

Candida; Candida spp; candidaemia; candidemia; candidiasis; deep fungal infection; fungemia; immunodeficiency

Funding

  1. MSD Australia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study identified risk factors for candidaemia, including neutropenia, solid organ transplant, significant liver, respiratory or cardiovascular disease, recent gastrointestinal, biliary or urological surgery, central venous access device, intravenous drug use, urinary catheter and carbapenem receipt. Preventive strategies should target iatrogenic disruption of mucocutaneous barriers and intravenous drug use.
Objectives Candidaemia carries a mortality of up to 40% and may be related to increasing complexity of medical care. Here, we determined risk factors for the development of candidaemia. Methods We conducted a prospective, multi-centre, case-control study over 12 months. Cases were aged >= 18 years with at least one blood culture positive for Candida spp. Each case was matched with two controls, by age within 10 years, admission within 6 months, admitting unit, and admission duration at least as long as the time between admission and onset of candidaemia. Results A total of 118 incident cases and 236 matched controls were compared. By multivariate analysis, risk factors for candidaemia included neutropenia, solid organ transplant, significant liver, respiratory or cardiovascular disease, recent gastrointestinal, biliary or urological surgery, central venous access device, intravenous drug use, urinary catheter and carbapenem receipt. Conclusions Risk factors for candidaemia derive from the infection source, carbapenem use, host immune function and organ-based co-morbidities. Preventive strategies should target iatrogenic disruption of mucocutaneous barriers and intravenous drug use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available