ArticleBMC infectious diseases2026
Clinical implications in patients with isolation of Candidozyma auris in a single tertiary hospital.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCandidozyma auris is an emerging multidrug-resistant pathogen, posing challenges for infection control and management. The annual trend of C. auris isolation and its clinical implications for affected patients were accessed.
methodsAll adult patients with C. auris isolated from clinical specimens between 2022 and 2024 were included. The medical records of all the patients were retrospectively investigated.
resultsThe first case of C. auris infection was reported in 2022. C. auris isolates increased from one in 2022 and 2023 to 23 in 2024. The clade analysis performed on available blood culture isolates (n = 6) confirmed that all analyzed isolates belonged to clade I. All patients had underlying conditions, and 20 patients (80%) had recent intensive care unit admissions. Urine was the most common source of C. auris (14 cases [56%]), followed by blood (six cases [24%]). Of the five patients with C. auris bloodstream infections and central venous catheters (CVCs), three had confirmed to have definite central line-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs), while the remaining two had no other identifiable primary source besides the CVC. Among patients with C. auris in urine, one of 14 (7.1%) developed septic shock, compared with two of six (33.3%) with bloodstream isolates. The 14- and 30-day mortality rates were 24% (6/25) and 32% (8/25), respectively. The mortality rate attributable to C. auris isolation was 8% (2/25). The two deceased patients had CRBSI caused by C. auris.
conclusionsAll C. auris isolates identified from blood cultures belonged to clade I. The isolation rate of C. auris is showing an increasing trend. Bloodstream infections caused by C. auris predominantly occurred in patients with CVCs and were associated with higher attributable mortality.
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.