Prior colonisation with Candida species fails to guide empirical therapy for candidaemia in critically ill adults

Diagnosis and Management of Invasive Candida Infections in Critically Ill Patients

Invasive candidiasis (IC) has become a serious problem in the intensive care unit patients with an attributable mortality rate that can reach up to 51%. Multiple global surveillance studies have shown an increasing incidence of candidemia. Despite their limited sensitivity (21-71%), cultures remain the gold standard for the diagnosis of IC associated with candidemia. Many adjunct laboratory tests exist to support or rule out the diagnosis, each with its indications and limitations, including procalcitonin, 1,3-β-D-glucan, mannan and anti-mannan antibodies, and Candida albicans germ tube antibody. In addition, polymerase chain reaction-based methods could expedite species identification in positive blood cultures, helping in guiding early empirical antifungal therapy. The management of IC in critically ill patients can be classified into prophylactic, preemptive, empiric, and directed/targeted therapy of a documented infection. There is no consensus concerning the benefit of prophylactic therapy in critically ill patients. While early initiation of appropriate therapy in confirmed IC is an important determinant of survival, the selection of candidates and drug of choice for empirical systemic antifungal therapy is more controversial. The choice of antifungal agents is determined by many factors, including the host, the site of infection, the species of the isolated Candida, and its susceptibility profile. Echinocandins are considered initial first-line therapy agents. Due to the conflicting results of the various studies on the benefit of preemptive therapy for critically ill patients and the lack of robust evidence, the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) omitted this category from its updated guidelines and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) and the Critically Ill Patients Study Group of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) do not recommend it.

Use and outcome of empiric echinocandins in critically ill patients

BACKGROUND

Echinocandins are recommended as a first-line empiric treatment for fungal infections of patients in an intensive care unit (ICU) with critical illness. The primary aim of the study was to compare outcomes among ICU patients treated with empiric anidulafungin (ANI), caspofungin (CASPO), or micafungin (MICA).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study in a mixed adult ICU. Patient demographics, reason for ICU admission, ICU risk scores and organ support therapies were analyzed. Outcome parameters included ICU and hospital stay, 30-day mortality and 1-year mortality.

RESULTS

Empiric echinocandin therapy was given to 367 patients (ANI; 73 patients, CASPO; 84 patients, and MICA; 210 patients) with a median duration of 3 days in an ICU. Patient median age was 60.7 years. As a first-line therapy, 52% of patients received fluconazole. Positive Candida cultures were found in the following samples: blood, 16 (4.4%); central line, 27 (7.4%); deep site, 92 (25.1%). Median ICU stay (ANI 6.4 days, CASPO 5.3 days, MICA 8.1 days), hospital stay (ANI 33 days, CASPO 30 days, MICA 30 days), 30-day mortality (ANI 27%, CASPO 32%, MICA 32%), and 1-year mortality (ANI 33%, CASPO 44%, MICA 45%) did not differ between the groups . The cost of antifungal therapy during the ICU period was similar in the three echinocandin groups (ANI; €1 872, CASPO; €1 799, and MICA; €1783).

CONCLUSION

Our results show that ICU, hospital stay, and mortality (hospital, 30-day and 1-year) did not differ among patients with empiric anidulafungin, caspofungin, or micafungin treatment in a mixed adult ICU.

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020)

The Japanese Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2020 (J-SSCG 2020), a Japanese-specific set of clinical practice guidelines for sepsis and septic shock created as revised from J-SSCG 2016 jointly by the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the Japanese Association for Acute Medicine, was first released in September 2020 and published in February 2021. An English-language version of these guidelines was created based on the contents of the original Japanese-language version. The purpose of this guideline is to assist medical staff in making appropriate decisions to improve the prognosis of patients undergoing treatment for sepsis and septic shock. We aimed to provide high-quality guidelines that are easy to use and understand for specialists, general clinicians, and multidisciplinary medical professionals. J-SSCG 2016 took up new subjects that were not present in SSCG 2016 (e.g., ICU-acquired weakness [ICU-AW], post-intensive care syndrome [PICS], and body temperature management). The J-SSCG 2020 covered a total of 22 areas with four additional new areas (patient- and family-centered care, sepsis treatment system, neuro-intensive treatment, and stress ulcers). A total of 118 important clinical issues (clinical questions, CQs) were extracted regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. These CQs also include those that have been given particular focus within Japan. This is a large-scale guideline covering multiple fields; thus, in addition to the 25 committee members, we had the participation and support of a total of 226 members who are professionals (physicians, nurses, physiotherapists, clinical engineers, and pharmacists) and medical workers with a history of sepsis or critical illness. The GRADE method was adopted for making recommendations, and the modified Delphi method was used to determine recommendations by voting from all committee members. As a result, 79 GRADE-based recommendations, 5 Good Practice Statements (GPS), 18 expert consensuses, 27 answers to background questions (BQs), and summaries of definitions and diagnosis of sepsis were created as responses to 118 CQs. We also incorporated visual information for each CQ according to the time course of treatment, and we will also distribute this as an app. The J-SSCG 2020 is expected to be widely used as a useful bedside guideline in the field of sepsis treatment both in Japan and overseas involving multiple disciplines.

Impact of initial empirical antifungal agents on the outcome of critically ill patients with invasive candidiasis: analysis of the China-SCAN study

The effect of different empirical antifungal agents on the clinical outcome of critically ill patients with invasive candidiasis (IC) has not been fully elucidated. In this study, 136 patients with proven IC who received empirical therapy in the China-SCAN multicentre study were retrospectively analysed. Initial empirical antifungal monotherapy consisted of a triazole [fluconazole (n = 61), voriconazole (n = 20) or itraconazole (n = 12)] or an echinocandin (n = 43). Hospital mortality as the primary outcome and global responses (clinical and microbiological) were assessed. The results indicated that rates of hospital mortality (P = 0.006) and intensive care unit (ICU) mortality (P = 0.011) were significantly lower in patients treated with an echinocandin compared with those receiving fluconazole, voriconazole or itraconazole. Multivariate regression analysis indicated that the type of antifungal agent used in empirical therapy was an independent predictor of hospital mortality (P = 0.033). Initial empirical echinocandin treatment was associated with decreased hospital mortality compared with fluconazole [odds ratio (OR) = 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.85; P = 0.028], voriconazole (OR = 0.11, 95% CI 0.02-0.56; P = 0.008) or itraconazole (OR = 0.12, 95% CI 0.02-0.72; P = 0.020). Similar findings were observed for the clinical success endpoint. This study demonstrated that the initial empirical antifungal agent was an independent predictor of hospital mortality in critically ill patients with IC. Empirical therapy with an echinocandin was associated with decreased hospital mortality and greater clinical success than empirical therapy with fluconazole, voriconazole or itraconazole.

Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Candidiasis: 2016 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America

It is important to realize that guidelines cannot always account for individual variation among patients. They are not intended to supplant physician judgment with respect to particular patients or special clinical situations. IDSA considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in the light of each patient's individual circumstances.

Invasive candidiasis in intensive care unit; consensus statement from an Iranian panel of experts, July 2013

Invasive candidiasis (IC) is associated with high mortality in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Timely diagnosis of this potentially fatal condition remains a challenge; on the other hand, the criteria for initiating empirical antifungal therapy in critically ill patients are not well defined in different patient population and ICU settings. Alongside the international guidelines, reaching regional and local consensus on diagnosis and management of IC in ICU setting is essential. This report summarizes our present status of IC management in ICU, considered by a group of Iranian experts in the fields of intensive care and infectious diseases. A round table of 17 experts was held to review the available data and discuss the optimal treatment strategies for IC in critical care setting. Comparative published data on the management of IC were analytically reviewed and the commonly asked questions about the management of IC in ICU were isolated. These questions were interactively discussed by the panel and audience responses were taken to consolidate point-to-point agreement with the panel arriving at consensus in many instances. The responses indicated that patients’ risk stratification, clinical discretion, fungal diagnostic techniques and the empirical therapy for IC are likely to save more patients. Treatment options were recommended to be based on the disease severity, prior azole exposure, and the presence of suspected azole-resistant Candida species. This report was reviewed, edited and discussed by all participants to include further evidence-based insights. The panel expects such endorsed recommendations to be soon formulated for implementation across the country.

Fatal candidemia caused by azole-resistant Candida tropicalis in patients with hematological malignancies

Candida tropicalis is one of the most important Candida species causative of candidemia that is isolated from the blood of patients with hematological malignancies. Candidemia caused by C. tropicalis is known to be highly virulent in neutropenic patients. C. tropicalis has been shown to be favorably sensitive to azole agents in general. Here we discuss 5 cases of candidemia caused by C. tropicalis in patients with hematological malignancies in our unit, and we note that 4 isolates were resistant to azole agents, including fluconazole, itraconazole, and voriconazole. In addition, 2 patients developed breakthrough candidemia caused by C. tropicalis while receiving prophylaxis with azole agents. Interestingly, 2 of the 4 patients with azole-resistant C. tropicalis isolates had never received any antifungal drugs. We also examined the susceptibilities of C. tropicalis to antifungal agents, using 39 non-blood isolates detected from 2003 to 2009. Around 40 % of the isolates were resistant to azole agents, and all of them were highly sensitive to amphotericin B and micafungin. The resistance to azoles was not associated with previous exposure to those agents. In our unit, 2 of the 4 cases of candidemia caused by azole-resistant C. tropicalis resulted in a poor prognosis. These findings suggested that empirical therapeutic strategies for candidemia should be modified based on the local antifungal resistance pattern.