Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Critical Care 1/2019

Open Access 01.12.2019 | Letter

Need for expanded Candida Score for empiric antifungal use in medically critically ill patients?

verfasst von: Melanie E. Laine, Alexander H. Flannery, Breanna Moody, Melissa L. Thompson Bastin

Erschienen in: Critical Care | Ausgabe 1/2019

download
DOWNLOAD
print
DRUCKEN
insite
SUCHEN
Hinweise

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Candida spp. rank among the top four nosocomial bloodstream infections in critically ill patients with up to 40% mortality despite antifungal therapy [1]. The utility of biomarkers such as β-1,3-d-glucan and procalcitonin, alone or in combination, demonstrate promise; nevertheless, bedside scoring tools are useful for guiding clinical decision-making [2]. Recent guidelines recommend the use of risk prediction tools to facilitate earlier recognition and initiation of antifungal therapy [3]. Commonly cited is the “Candida Score,” which showed sensitivity and specificity for invasive candidiasis of 81% and 74%, respectively, for scores > 2.5 [4]. This was a mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patient population, with only 35% of admissions for medical reasons. Thus, the application of this tool for patients with nonsurgical reasons for ICU admission may be poor. Additionally, certain components of the score, surgery and parenteral nutrition (PN), may be less applicable to the medical ICU (MICU) population. Although other predictive tools have been developed, they have not been validated prospectively like the Candida Score and carry low positive predictive values.
Based on 10 years of experience in our MICU in patients with positive blood cultures for Candida spp. (n = 139), we found that only 37% of patients had a positive Candida Score (i.e., > 2.5) (Table 1). Sixteen percent of candidemia cases scored 0, 23% scored 1, and 24% scored 2 (Fig. 1). The most common risk factors were severe sepsis/septic shock (53%) and multifocal Candida colonization (62%).
Table 1
Patient demographics
 
n = 139
Age (mean ± SD)
53 ± 14.4
Gender (% female)
51%
Caucasian
88%
ICU LOS (median, days)
18 (8–31)
LOS prior to positive culture (median, days)
9 (3–21)
Comorbidities
 ESRD
13 (9%)
 Cirrhosis
24 (17%)
 Neoplasm
25 (18%)
 Necrotizing pancreatitis
5 (4%)
Corticosteroids
 Recent steroid use*
29 (21%)
 Cumulative steroid dose (median, milligrams^)
745 (600–1525)
 Total steroid duration (median, days)
19 (12–30)
Candida colonization
 Respiratory
59 (42%)
 Urine
57 (41%)
 Multifocal
86 (62%)
SD standard deviation, LOS length of stay, ESRD end stage renal disease
*Prednisone 20 mg equivalent × 2 weeks or 30 mg equivalent × 1 week
^Prednisone equivalents
While our experience demonstrates less than half of MICU patients with candidemia meet the formal cut-off for a positive Candida Score, previous data reported an incidence of invasive candidiasis of only 2.3% with a score < 3 [5]. We note differences between our cohort and Leon et al. in those with proven infection [4]. Our patients had a much higher incidence of chronic liver disease (17% versus 2%) and more end-stage renal disease (9% versus 4.1%). Conversely, PN use was notably higher in the Leon study (87.6% versus 6%), along with recent surgery (52.6% versus 22%), as compared to our patients. Severe sepsis and multifocal Candida colonization were comparable, suggesting other risk factors may be present in the MICU population not captured by the Candida Score. Expanded scoring criteria is necessary to more accurately identify critically ill patients who warrant empiric antifungal therapy, and prospective studies evaluating additional risk factors and the role of non-culture diagnostics are needed.

Acknowledgements

None
The Institutional Review Board of the University of Kentucky approved this study (protocol number 15-1025-P6K).
Not applicable

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Lamoth F. Changes in the epidemiologic landscape of invasive candidiasis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(Suppl1):i4–i13.CrossRef Lamoth F. Changes in the epidemiologic landscape of invasive candidiasis. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(Suppl1):i4–i13.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Cortegiani A, et al. Procalcitonin levels in candidemia versus bacteremia: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2019;23:190.CrossRef Cortegiani A, et al. Procalcitonin levels in candidemia versus bacteremia: a systematic review. Crit Care. 2019;23:190.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Martin-Loeches I, et al. ESICM/ESCMID task force on practical management of invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45:789–805.CrossRef Martin-Loeches I, et al. ESICM/ESCMID task force on practical management of invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients. Intensive Care Med. 2019;45:789–805.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Leon C, et al. A bedside scoring system (“Candida score”) for early antifungal treatment in nonneutropenic critically ill patients with Candida colonization. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:730–7.CrossRef Leon C, et al. A bedside scoring system (“Candida score”) for early antifungal treatment in nonneutropenic critically ill patients with Candida colonization. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:730–7.CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Leon, et al. Usefulness of the “Candida score” for discriminating between Candida colonization and invasive candidiasis in non-neutropenic critically ill patients: a prospective multicenter study. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1624–33.CrossRef Leon, et al. Usefulness of the “Candida score” for discriminating between Candida colonization and invasive candidiasis in non-neutropenic critically ill patients: a prospective multicenter study. Crit Care Med. 2009;37:1624–33.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Need for expanded Candida Score for empiric antifungal use in medically critically ill patients?
verfasst von
Melanie E. Laine
Alexander H. Flannery
Breanna Moody
Melissa L. Thompson Bastin
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2019
Verlag
BioMed Central
Erschienen in
Critical Care / Ausgabe 1/2019
Elektronische ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-019-2525-3

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2019

Critical Care 1/2019 Zur Ausgabe

Letter

Response

Update AINS

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.