ArticleCritical care (London, England)2020
Factors associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia: a post hoc analysis from two prospective cohorts.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
20 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Source Control inOpen forum infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Retrospective analysis of the epidemiological characteristics, risk factors, survival rate, and drug resistance of candidemia and construction of a logistic regression prediction model (2013-2024).BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Pharmacological Management of Oral and Esophageal Candidiasis: A Clinical Pharmacotherapy Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Trends in Candidemia Over the Last 14 Years: A Comparative Analysis ofOpen forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Early-Onset Candidemia in Adult Intensive Care Units.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Lethal soft-tissue necrosis early after organ transplantation: a case report.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2025Article
- Emerging pathogens: the underestimated risk ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Invasive Fungal Diseases in Adult Patients in Intensive Care Unit (FUNDICU): 2024 consensus definitions from ESGCIP, EFISG, ESICM, ECMM, MSGERC, ISAC, and ISHAM.Intensive care medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- The FVirulence · 2023Article
- Reappraisal of intra-abdominal candidiasis: insights from peritoneal fluid analysis.Intensive care medicine experimental · 2023Article
- An Overview onJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Biofilm: The invisible culprit in catheter-induced candidemia.AIMS microbiology · 2023Review
- Novel evidence on sepsis-inducing pathogens: from laboratory to bedside.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Short Course of Antifungal Therapy in Patients With UncomplicatedOpen forum infectious diseases · 2023Article
- Article
- Initial antimicrobial management of sepsis.Critical care (London, England) · 2021Review
- Effects of sepsis and its treatment measures on intestinal flora structure in critical care patients.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Article
- Epidemiological Trends of Candidemia and the Impact of Adherence to the Candidemia Guideline: Six-Year Single-Center Experience.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Rapid Detection Method for PathogenicInternational journal of nanomedicine · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
31 authors at 14 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlmost one third of the patients with candidemia develop septic shock. The understanding why some patients do and others do not develop septic shock is very limited. The objective of this study was to identify variables associated with septic shock development in a large population of patients with candidemia.
methodsA post hoc analysis was performed on two prospective, multicenter cohort of patients with candidemia from 12 hospitals in Spain and Italy. All episodes occurring from September 2016 to February 2018 were analyzed to assess variables associated with septic shock development defined according to The Third International Consensus Definition for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3).
resultsOf 317 candidemic patients, 99 (31.2%) presented septic shock attributable to candidemia. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identifies the following factors associated with septic shock development: age > 50 years (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.03-6.41, p = 0.04), abdominal source of the infection (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.04-4.55, p = 0.04), and admission to a general ward at the time of candidemia onset (OR 0.21, 95% CI, 0.12-0.44, p = 0.001). Septic shock development was independently associated with a greater risk of 30-day mortality (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.08-4.24, p = 0.02).
conclusionsAge and abdominal source of the infection are the most important factors significantly associated with the development of septic shock in patients with candidemia. Our findings suggest that host factors and source of the infection may be more important for development of septic shock than intrinsic virulence factors of organisms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.