Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25412592›Full record

Observational studyWiener klinische Wochenschrift2015

Invasive Candida infections in patients of a medical intensive care unit: attempt of improving diagnosis by quantifying the colonization.

Sebastian Kautzky, Thomas Staudinger, Elisabeth Presterl

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Associations Between Candida andMicroorganisms · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sebastian KautzkyLK Waidhofen/Ybbs, Waidhofen/Ybbs, Austria.
Thomas Staudinger
Elisabeth Presterl
Medical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDuring the past decades, a steady increase in the incidence of invasive Candida infections in patients requiring intensive care has been reported. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of invasive Candida infections in the intensive care unit setting remains still difficult and is often made late in the course of disease. Additionally, prognosis worsens rapidly with delayed initiation of antifungal therapy. Clinical scoring systems such as the Candida colonization index or the four risk factor-based Candida score could be very useful tools to select patients at high risk of developing invasive Candida infections, who would benefit from the administration of systemic antifungal therapy.

objectivesThe main objective was to determine the incidence of invasive Candida infection among patients of a medical intensive care unit and to investigate its association with the Candida colonization index and the Candida score. MATERIAL AND

methodsA prospective, observational, single-center study was performed from December 2010 to December 2011. All patients over the age of 18 years who were admitted for at least 7 days in a medical intensive care unit were included. Demographic characteristics, underlying diseases, reasons for intensive care unit admission and presence and duration of risk factors for Candida species colonization and infection were collected for each patient. The Candida colonization index and the Candida score were calculated weekly until discharge or death.

resultsA total of 65 patients were included. Proven invasive Candida infections were diagnosed in five patients (7.7 %), i.e. two developed candidemia, two peritonitis, and one pneumonia. All of these patients were characterized by a Candida colonization index ≥ 0.5 (incidence rate: 16.7 % [5/30]) and a Candida score ≥ 2.5 (incidence rate: 29.4 % [5/17]). Mechanical ventilation (p = 0.013) and both Candida scoring systems (p = 0.013 versus p < 0.001) were statistically and significantly associated with invasive Candida infections. The mortality rate was high (80 %). Interestingly, treatment with antifungal drugs was not statistically and significantly associated with invasive candidiasis (p = 0.077) and patients outcome (p = 0.057).

conclusionBoth the Candida colonization index and the Candida score with cut-off values ≥ 0.5 and ≥ 2.5 are very useful tools to select patients at high risk of developing invasive Candida infections in the medical intensive care unit setting, who would benefit from early antifungal treatment.

Indexed as

AustriaCandidiasisColony Count, MicrobialCross InfectionFemaleHumansIncidenceIntensive Care UnitsLength of StayMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsRisk AssessmentSensitivity and SpecificitySeverity of Illness Index

Identifiers

PMID25412592
OpenAlexW1240374137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.