Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-015-0997-6
DC FieldValue
dc.titleCandida Surveillance in Surgical Intensive Care Unit (SICU) in a Tertiary Institution
dc.contributor.authorLiew, Y.X
dc.contributor.authorTeo, J
dc.contributor.authorToo, I.A.-L
dc.contributor.authorNgan, C.C.-L
dc.contributor.authorTan, A.L
dc.contributor.authorChlebicki, M.P
dc.contributor.authorKwa, A.L.-H
dc.contributor.authorLee, W
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-27T10:57:04Z
dc.date.available2020-10-27T10:57:04Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier.citationLiew, Y.X, Teo, J, Too, I.A.-L, Ngan, C.C.-L, Tan, A.L, Chlebicki, M.P, Kwa, A.L.-H, Lee, W (2015). Candida Surveillance in Surgical Intensive Care Unit (SICU) in a Tertiary Institution. BMC Infectious Diseases 15 (1) : 256. ScholarBank@NUS Repository. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-015-0997-6
dc.identifier.issn14712334
dc.identifier.urihttps://scholarbank.nus.edu.sg/handle/10635/181445
dc.description.abstractBackground: Colonization of patients occurs before development into invasive candidiasis. There is a need to determine the incidences of Candida colonization and infection in SICU patients, and evaluate the usefulness of beta-D-glucan (BDG) assay in diagnosing invasive candidiasis when patients are colonized. Methods: Clinical data and fungal surveillance cultures in 28 patients were recorded from November 2010, and January to February 2011. Susceptibilities of Candida isolates to fluconazole, voriconazole, amphotericin B, micafungin, caspofungin and anidulafungin were tested via Etest. The utilities of BDG, Candida score and colonization index for candidiasis diagnosis were compared via ROC. Results: 30 BDG assays were performed in 28 patients. Four assay cases had concurrent colonization and infection; 23 had concurrent colonization and no infection; three had no concurrent colonization and infection. Of 136 surveillance swabs, 52 (38.24 %) were positive for Candida spp, with C. albicans being the commonest. Azole resistance was detected in C. albicans (7 %). C. glabrata and C. tropicalis were, respectively, 100 and 7 % SDD to fluconazole. All 3 tests showed high sensitivity of 75-100 % but poor specificity ranging 15.38-38.46 %. BDG performed the best (AUC of 0.89). Conclusions: Despite that positive BDG is common in surgical patients with Candida spp colonization, BDG performed the best when compared to CI and CS. © 2015 Liew et al.
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
dc.sourceUnpaywall 20201031
dc.subjectamphotericin B
dc.subjectanidulafungin
dc.subjectcaspofungin
dc.subjectfluconazole
dc.subjectmicafungin
dc.subjectvoriconazole
dc.subjectanidulafungin
dc.subjectantifungal agent
dc.subjectbeta glucan
dc.subjectcaspofungin
dc.subjectechinocandin
dc.subjectlipopeptide
dc.subjectmicafungin
dc.subjectabdominal drainage
dc.subjectadult
dc.subjectaged
dc.subjectantifungal susceptibility
dc.subjectAPACHE
dc.subjectArticle
dc.subjectassay
dc.subjectCandida albicans
dc.subjectCandida glabrata
dc.subjectCandida score
dc.subjectCandida tropicalis
dc.subjectcholecystectomy
dc.subjectclinical article
dc.subjectcolonization index
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectdiagnostic accuracy
dc.subjectdiagnostic test
dc.subjectdiagnostic test accuracy study
dc.subjectdisease surveillance
dc.subjectduodenum ulcer
dc.subjectfungal colonization
dc.subjectfungal phenomena and functions
dc.subjectfungus culture
dc.subjectfungus identification
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectincidence
dc.subjectintensive care unit
dc.subjectintermethod comparison
dc.subjectinvasive candidiasis
dc.subjectlaparotomy
dc.subjectlength of stay
dc.subjectmiddle aged
dc.subjectnonhuman
dc.subjectpredictive value
dc.subjectreceiver operating characteristic
dc.subjectsensitivity and specificity
dc.subjectsmear
dc.subjectsurgical ward
dc.subjecttertiary health care
dc.subjectCandida
dc.subjectcandidiasis
dc.subjectCandidiasis, Invasive
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjectheterozygote
dc.subjectintensive care
dc.subjectisolation and purification
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectmicrobial sensitivity test
dc.subjectmicrobiology
dc.subjectphysiology
dc.subjectSingapore
dc.subjecttertiary care center
dc.subjectvery elderly
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAged
dc.subjectAged, 80 and over
dc.subjectAmphotericin B
dc.subjectAntifungal Agents
dc.subjectbeta-Glucans
dc.subjectCandida
dc.subjectCandida albicans
dc.subjectCandida glabrata
dc.subjectCandidiasis
dc.subjectCandidiasis, Invasive
dc.subjectCarrier State
dc.subjectCritical Care
dc.subjectEchinocandins
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectFluconazole
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectIncidence
dc.subjectIntensive Care Units
dc.subjectLipopeptides
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectMicrobial Sensitivity Tests
dc.subjectMiddle Aged
dc.subjectSensitivity and Specificity
dc.subjectSingapore
dc.subjectTertiary Care Centers
dc.subjectVoriconazole
dc.typeArticle
dc.contributor.departmentDUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL
dc.description.doi10.1186/s12879-015-0997-6
dc.description.sourcetitleBMC Infectious Diseases
dc.description.volume15
dc.description.issue1
dc.description.page256
Appears in Collections:Elements
Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
10_1186_s12879-015-0997-6.pdf319.16 kBAdobe PDF

OPEN

NoneView/Download

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons