ArticleCritical care (London, England)2024
Relationship between SARS-CoV-2 infection and ICU-acquired candidemia in critically ill medical patients: a multicenter prospective cohort study.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Candidemia Epidemiology and Antifungal Resistance in Critically-ill Patients During and After COVID-19 Pandemic: Comparison Between Two Hospitals in Greece and Türkiye.Mycopathologia · 2026Article
- Risk factors for intensive care unit coronavirus disease 2019 pneumonia-associated invasive fungal infections: a Bayesian evidence synthesis integrating external and real-world data.Virology journal · 2026Article
- Temporal Trends and Seasonality of Invasive Candidiasis During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis in Colombia.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prognostic factors of invasive fungal infections in pediatric intensive care units and changes in treatment outcomes before and after the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicenter retrospective study.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile SARS-CoV2 infection has been shown to be a significant risk-factor for several secondary bacterial, viral and Aspergillus infections, its impact on intensive care unit (ICU)-acquired candidemia (ICAC) remains poorly explored.
methodUsing the REA-REZO network (French surveillance network of ICU-acquired infections), we included all adult patients hospitalized for a medical reason of admission in participating ICUs for at least 48 h from January 2020 to January 2023. To account for confounders, a non-parsimonious propensity score matching was performed. Rates of ICAC according to SARS-CoV2 status were compared in matched patients. Factors associated with ICAC in COVID-19 patients were also assessed using a Fine-Gray model.
resultsA total of 55,268 patients hospitalized at least 48 h for a medical reason in 101 ICUs were included along the study period. Of those, 13,472 were tested positive for a SARS-CoV2 infection while 284 patients developed an ICAC. ICAC rate was higher in COVID-19 patients in both the overall population and the matched patients' cohort (0.8% (107/13,472) versus 0.4% (173/41,796); p < 0.001 and 0.8% (93/12,241) versus 0.5% (57/12,241); p = 0.004, respectively). ICAC incidence rate was also higher in those patients (incidence rate 0.51 per 1000 patients-days in COVID-19 patients versus 0.32 per 1000 patients-days; incidence rate ratio: 1.58 [95% CI:1.08-2.35]; p = 0.018). Finally, patients with ICAC had a higher ICU mortality rate (49.6% versus 20.2%; p < 0.001).
conclusionIn this large multicenter cohort of ICU patients, although remaining low, the rate of ICAC was higher among COVID-19 patients.
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.