Nosocomial candidemia in patients admitted to medicine wards compared to other wards: a multicentre study

Abstract

Purpose

Risk factors for nosocomial candidemia, severity of sepsis, treatment, and outcome were compared between patients admitted to medicine wards and those to surgical and intensive care units (ICUs).

Methods

Data were retrospectively collected from patients belonging to six referral hospitals in Italy between January 2011 and December 2013. Risk factors for 30-day mortality were evaluated in the whole patient population.

Results

A total of 686 patients (mean age 70 ± 15 years) with candidemia were included. 367 (53.5 %) patients were in medicine wards, and 319 in surgery and ICUs. Host-related risk factors for candidemia were more common in medicine patients whereas healthcare-related factors in surgery/ICU patients. These patients showed severe sepsis and septic shock more commonly (71.7 %) than medicine patients (59.9 %) (p 0.003). The latter underwent central venous catheter (CVC) removal and adequate antifungal therapy less frequently than surgery/ICU patients. 149 (40.6 %) patients died with candidemia in medicine wards and 69 (21.6 %) in other wards (p < 0.001). Overall, the 30-day mortality was 36.3 %. At multivariate analysis, independent risk factors for death were aging, higher Charlson score, severe sepsis and septic shock, and no antifungal therapy, while major surgery and CVC removal were associated with higher probability of survival.

Conclusions

The burden of risk factors for candidemia was different between medicine patients and those in other wards. Despite the lower severity of candidemia in medicine patients, their mortality turned out to be higher than in surgery or ICU patients. Awareness of the best management of candidemia should be pursued, especially in medicine wards.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. 1.

    Bitar D, Lortholary O, Le Strat Y, Nicolau J, Coignard B, Tattevin P, Che D, Dromer F. Population-based analysis of invasive fungal infections, France, 2001–2010. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;20:1149–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Wisplinghoff H, Ebbers J, Geurt J, et al. Nosocomial bloodstream infections due to Candida spp. in the USA: species distribution, clinical features and antifungal susceptibilities. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2014;43:78–81.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Horn DL, Neofytos D, Anaissie EJ, et al. Epidemiology and outcomes of candidemia in 2019 patients: data from the prospective antifungal therapy alliance registry. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48:1695–703.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Bassetti M, Molinari MP, Mussap M, Viscoli C, Righi E. Candidemia in internal medicine departments: the burden of a rising problem. Clin Microb Infect. 2013;19:E281–4.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Luzzati R, Cavinato S, Deiana ML, Rosin C, Maurel C, Borelli M. Epidemiology and outcome of nosocomial candidemia in elderly patients admitted prevalently in medical wards. Aging Clin Exp Res. 2015;27:131–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    De Rosa FG, Corcione S, Filippini S, et al. The effect on mortality of fluconazole or echinocandins treatment in candidemia in internal medicine wards. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0125149.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Nieto MC, Telleria O, Cisterna R. Sentinel surveillance of invasive candidiasis in Spain: epidemiology and antifungal susceptibility. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015;81:34–40.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Lortholary O, Ranaudat C, Sitbon K, et al. Worrisome trends in incidence and mortality of candidemia in intensive care units (Paris area, 2002–2010). Intensive Care Med. 2014;40:1303–12.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Epidemiology of invasive candidiasis: a persistent public health problem. Clin Microb Rev. 2007;20:133–63.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Test. Antimicrobials for Candida infections-EUCAST clinical MIC breakpoints. 2013;2013-03-11 (v 6.1).

  11. 11.

    Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, et al. Definition for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physician/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest. 1992;101:1644–55.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:373–83.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Swets JA. Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic system. Science. 1988;240:1285–93.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Guimaraes T, Nucci M, Mendonca JS, et al. Epidemiology and predictors of a poor outcome in elderly patients with candidemia. Int J Infect Dis. 2012;16:e442–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Wang H, Liu N, Yin M, et al. The epidemiology, antifungal use and risk factors of death in elderly patients with candidemia: a multicentre retrospective study. BMC Infect Dis. 2014;14:609.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Eggimann P, Garbino J, Pittet D. Epidemiology of Candida species infections in critically ill non-immunosuppressed patients. Lancet Infect Dis. 2003;3:685–702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Bassetti M, Merelli M, Righi E, et al. Epidemiology, species distribution, antifungal susceptibility, and outcome of candidemia across five sites in Italy and Spain. J Clin Microb. 2013;51:4167–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    De Rosa GF, Trecarichi EM, Montrucchio C, et al. Mortality in patients with early- and late-onset candidaemia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2013;68:927–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Castle SC, Uyemura K, Fulop T, Mafinodan T. Host resistance and immune responses in advanced age. Clin Geriatr. 2007;23:463–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Guinea J. Global trends in the distribution of Candida species causing candidemia. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20:5–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ. Role of sentinel surveillance of candidemia: trends in species distribution and antifungal susceptibility. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40:3551–7.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Pfaller MA, Diekema DJ, Jones RN, Messer SA, Hollis RJ. Trends in antifungal susceptibility of Candida spp. isolated from pediatric and adult patients with bloodstream infections: sentry antimicrobial surveillance program, 1997 to 2000. J Clin Microbiol. 2002;40:852–6.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Pfaller MA, Boyken L, Hollis RJ, et al. Comparison of results of fluconazole and voriconazole disk diffusion testing for Candida spp. with results from a central reference laboratory in the ARTEMIS DISK Global Antifungal Surveillance Program. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2009;25:27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Messer SA, Moet GJ, Kirby JT, Jones RN. Activity of contemporary antifungal agents, including the novel echinocandin anidulafungin, tested against Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp., and Aspergillus spp.: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (2006 to 2007). J Clin Microbiol. 2009;47:1942–6.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Luzzati R, Cavinato S, Giangreco M, et al. Peripheral and total parenteral nutrition as the strongest risk factors for nosocomial candidemia in elderly patients: a matched case–control study. Mycoses. 2013;56:664–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Tascini C, Sozio S, Tintori C, et al. Peripherally inserted central catheter as a predominant risk factor for candidemia in critically ill patients in internal medicine wards in Italy. Intensive Care Med. 2015;41:1498–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Puig-Asensio M, Padilla B, Garnacho-Montero J, et al. Epidemiology a predictive factors for early and late mortality in Candida bloodstream infections: a population-based surveillance in Spain. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20:O245–54.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes D, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2009;48:503–35.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Cornely OA, Bassetti M, Calandra T, ESCMID Fungal Infection Study Group. ESCMID guideline for the diagnosis and management of Candida diseases non-neutropenic adult patients. Clin Microb Infect. 2012;18:19–37.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Scudeller L, Viscoli C, Menichetti F, et al. An Italian consensus for invasive candidiasis management (ITALIC). Infection. 2014;42:263–79.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Andes DR, Safdar N, Baddley JW, et al. Impact of treatment strategy on outcomes in patients with candidemia and other form of invasive candidiasis: a patient-level quantitative review of randomized trials. Clin Infect Dis. 2012;54:1110–22.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Bassetti M, Righi E, Ansaldi F, et al. A multicenter study of septic shock due to candidemia: outcomes and predictors of mortality. Intensive Care Med. 2014;40:839–45.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Murri R, Scoppettuolo G, Ventura G, et al. Initial antifungal strategy does not correlate with mortality in patients with candide mia. Eur J Clin Microb. 2015;35:187–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Pappas PG, Kauffman CA, Andes DR, et al. Clinical practice guideline for the management of candidiasis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Sociey of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;62:e1–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Roberto Luzzati.

Ethics declarations

The study was approved by the local institutional review board. Patient characteristics of each hospital participating to the study were anonymized prior to be reported in a common electronic database. For this type of study formal consent is not required in Italy. The study has been performed in accordance with the ethical standards laid down in the 1964 declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.

Funding

The authors declare no funding.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Luzzati, R., Merelli, M., Ansaldi, F. et al. Nosocomial candidemia in patients admitted to medicine wards compared to other wards: a multicentre study. Infection 44, 747–755 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s15010-016-0924-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Candidemia
  • Epidemiology
  • Risk factors
  • Medicine wards
  • Elderly
  • Mortality