Background An increasing prevalence of candidemia has been reported in Internal Medicine wards (IMWs). The aim of our study was to identify risk factors for candidemia among non-neutropenic patients hospitalized in IMWs. Methods A multicenter case–control study was performed in three hospitals in Italy. Patients developing candidemia (cases) were compared to patients without candidemia (controls) matched by age, time of admission and duration of hospitalization. A logistic regression analysis identified risk factors for candidemia, and a new risk score was developed. Validation was performed on an external cohort of patients. Results Overall, 951 patients (317 cases of candidemia and 634 controls) were included in the derivation cohort, while 270 patients (90 patients with candidemia and 180 controls) constituted the validation cohort. Severe sepsis or septic shock, recent Clostridium difficile infection, diabetes mellitus, total parenteral nutrition, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, concomitant intravenous glycopeptide therapy, presence of peripherally inserted central catheter, previous antibiotic therapy and immunosuppressive therapy were factors independently associated with candidemia. The new risk score showed good area under the curve (AUC) values in both derivation (AUC 0.973 95% CI 0.809–0.997, p < 0.001) and validation cohort (0.867 95% CI 0.710–0.931, p < 0.001). A threshold of 3 leads to a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 83%. Conclusion Non-neutropenic patients admitted in IMWs have peculiar risk factors for candidemia. A new risk score with a good performance could facilitate the identification of candidates to early antifungal therapy.

Assessment of risk factors for candidemia in non-neutropenic patients hospitalized in Internal Medicine wards: A multicenter study

Russo A.;
2017-01-01

Abstract

Background An increasing prevalence of candidemia has been reported in Internal Medicine wards (IMWs). The aim of our study was to identify risk factors for candidemia among non-neutropenic patients hospitalized in IMWs. Methods A multicenter case–control study was performed in three hospitals in Italy. Patients developing candidemia (cases) were compared to patients without candidemia (controls) matched by age, time of admission and duration of hospitalization. A logistic regression analysis identified risk factors for candidemia, and a new risk score was developed. Validation was performed on an external cohort of patients. Results Overall, 951 patients (317 cases of candidemia and 634 controls) were included in the derivation cohort, while 270 patients (90 patients with candidemia and 180 controls) constituted the validation cohort. Severe sepsis or septic shock, recent Clostridium difficile infection, diabetes mellitus, total parenteral nutrition, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, concomitant intravenous glycopeptide therapy, presence of peripherally inserted central catheter, previous antibiotic therapy and immunosuppressive therapy were factors independently associated with candidemia. The new risk score showed good area under the curve (AUC) values in both derivation (AUC 0.973 95% CI 0.809–0.997, p < 0.001) and validation cohort (0.867 95% CI 0.710–0.931, p < 0.001). A threshold of 3 leads to a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 83%. Conclusion Non-neutropenic patients admitted in IMWs have peculiar risk factors for candidemia. A new risk score with a good performance could facilitate the identification of candidates to early antifungal therapy.
2017
Candidemia
Clostridium difficile infection
Internal Medicine
Non-neutropenic patients
Risk factors
Sepsis
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12317/84150
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 33
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 30
social impact