4.7 Review

Emerging Fungal Infections: New Species, New Names, and Antifungal Resistance

期刊

CLINICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 68, 期 1, 页码 83-90

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/clinchem/hvab217

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article introduces the importance of emerging fungal infections, antifungal resistance, and fungal co-infections with respiratory pathogens. These infections are challenging for both clinicians and laboratory personnel, and may lead to poor clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Infections caused by fungi can be important causes of morbidity and mortality in certain patient populations, including those who are highly immuno-compromised or critically ill. Invasive mycoses can be caused by well-known species, as well as emerging pathogens, including those that are resistant to clinically available antifungals. CONTENT: This review highlights emerging fungal infections, including newly described species, such as Candida auris, and those that having undergone taxonomic classification and were previously known by other names, including Blastomyces and Emergomyces species, members of the Rasamsonia argillacea species complex, Sporothrix brasiliensis, and Trichophyton indotinae. Antifungal resistance also is highlighted in several of these emerging species, as well as in the wellknown opportunistic pathogen Aspergillus fumigatus. Finally, the increased recognition and importance of fungal co-infections with respiratory pathogens, including severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is discussed. SUMMARY: Both clinicians and clinical microbiology laboratories should remain vi gilant regarding emerging fungal infections. These may be difficult both to diagnose and treat due to the lack of experience of clinicians and laboratory personnel with these organisms and the infections they may cause. Many of these fungal infections have been associated with poor clinical outcomes, either due to inappropriate therapy or the development of antifungal resistance.

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

4.7
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