4.5 Article

Candidemia in critically ill immunocompromised patients: report of a retrospective multicenter cohort study

期刊

ANNALS OF INTENSIVE CARE
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGEROPEN
DOI: 10.1186/s13613-019-0539-2

关键词

Candida; Hematological malignancy; Tumor; Solid; Immune defect; Intensive care unit; Shock

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundImmunocompromised critically ill patients constitute a population with the high risk of candidemia. This retrospective study aimed to assess the outcome of immunocompromised critically ill patients with candidemia. Secondary objectives were to describe clinical phenotypes of these patients, Candida ecology, and factors associated with mortality.ResultsOverall, 121 patients were included in this study. Median delay from candidemia to first antifungal therapy was 3days, in line with the observed delay of blood culture positivity. Candia albicans was the main Candida specie identified (54%), and susceptibility of Candida to fluconazole and echinocandins was of, respectively, 70% and 92%. Hospital mortality was of 60%. After adjustment for confounders, severity as assessed by the need for vasopressors (HR 1.8, CI95% 1.1-3.1), need for mechanical ventilation (HR 2.0, CI95% 1.1-3.8) and allogenic stem cell transplantation (HR 2.5, CI95% 1.1-6.0) were independently associated with poor outcome. Candida specie, susceptibility and treatment strategies were not associated with outcome.ConclusionsCandidemia in immunocompromised critically ill patients is associated with a grim outcome. Despite the high prevalence of Candida non-albicans species, neither C. species nor its susceptibility was associated with outcome. Conversely, severity and preexisting allogeneic stem cell transplantation were independently associated with poor outcome. Despite antifungal prophylaxis and use of preemptive antifungal therapy in neutropenic patients, antifungal therapy was initiated three days after symptoms onset suggesting needs for specific strategies aiming to reduce this delay.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据