4.7 Article

Changing pattern of candidaemia 2001-2006 and use of antifungal therapy at the University Hospital of Vienna, Austria

期刊

CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION
卷 13, 期 11, 页码 1072-1076

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1111/J.1469-0691.2007.01812.x

关键词

antifungal agents; candidaemia; drug use; frequency; surveillance; therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A retrospective survey of candidaemia between 2001 and 2006 was performed at the University Hospital of Vienna, a 2200-bed centre with large organ transplantation and haematology-oncology units. The incidence rate of Candida spp. in blood cultures increased from 0.27 cases/1000 admissions in 2001 to 0.77 cases/1000 admissions in 2006 (p < 0.005). The incidence of candidaemia caused by Candida albicans and by non-albicans Candida spp. both increased during this period; although there was a trend towards an increased incidence (37%) of non-albicans Candida spp., particularly Candida glabrata, in surgical wards, C. albicans remained the predominant pathogen (63%). In the haematology-oncology unit, C. albicans remained the leading pathogen (23/29 isolates, 79%), followed by Candida tropicalis and C. glabrata (2/29, 7% each), Candida sake and Candida lusitaniae (1/29, 3% each). The overall survival rate was 43.8%, ranging from 32.8% in 2004 to 63.6% in 2002. In total, 108 (33.2%) patients died within 4 weeks of the first isolation of Candida spp. from blood; 58 (54%) of these patients died within the first 7 days, and a further 34 patients died within the next 3 months. Fluconazole was used extensively (24 701.5 defined daily doses), followed by amphotericin B (8981.4 defined daily doses), during 2005. The consumption of antifungal agents increased continuously (p < 0.05) because of increased use of voriconazole and caspofungin. Although the numbers of susceptible patients remained unchanged, the net increase in the number of cases of candidaemia warrants a re-evaluation of the risk-factors and the use of improved diagnostic procedures for invasive fungal infections.

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