ArticleAME case reports2025
Bradycardia in septic patients as an early sign of fungal bloodstream infection: a case series.
Article in AME case reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Fungemia has become an increasingly significant cause of morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Sepsis is generally recognized as a hyperdynamic condition, commonly characterized by tachycardia as part of the systemic inflammatory response. However, in rare instances, patients may exhibit a paradoxical response in the form of bradycardia. This atypical presentation should prompt heightened vigilance and consideration of an underlying threat. Case Description: A case series of 3 patients who had unexplained bradycardia with septic shock. Their blood culture showed fungal growth. Fortunately, within a few days of starting antifungal therapy, their bradycardia showed marked improvement. This improvement supports the assumption of relation between bradycardia and fungemia. Data collections were extended continuously over a 24-hour period. To ensure the accuracy and reliability of the recorded heart rate, the average of the three lowest recorded values was calculated. This approach was employed to minimize the potential impact of any isolated, coincidentally bradycardia readings that might not reflect the patient's overall condition. Conclusions: This study serves to underscore the paramount importance of maintaining a high index of suspicion for fungal pathogens in septic patients presenting with bradycardia, advocating for heightened clinical vigilance and a proactive approach to diagnostic and therapeutic decision-making. Furthermore, it underscores the urgent imperative for robust clinical research endeavors aimed at elucidating the efficacy and therapeutic impact of early antifungal interventions on the clinical outcomes in the context of sepsis.
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.