Predicting candidemia in the internal medicine wards: a comparison with gram-negative bacteremia—a retrospectives study

Alaa Atamna*, Noa Eliakim-Raz, Jenan Mohana, Haim Ben-Zvi, Nadav Sorek, Tzippy Shochat, Jihad Bishara

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Introduction: Risk factors for candidemia in the internal medicine wards (IMW) are poorly characterized. Their elucidation might assist in early diagnosis and treatment. Objectives: We aimed to elucidate predictors of candidemia in the IMWs comparing them to patients with gram-negative bacteremia (GNB). Methods: A retrospective study of consecutive patients with candidemia in IMWs in Beilinson hospital (2007–2016) was performed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics were documented. The comparator group was GNB patients. Results: Sixty-two patients with candidemia were compared with 178 patients with GNB. Candidemic patients were younger and with less body mass index > 20 kg/m2 (73 ± 15 vs. 78 ± 10, P = 0.01; 44% vs. 60%, P = <0.0001,respectively). In multivariate model, underweight, prior cephalosporin use, and central venous catheters (CVCs) were significantly associated with candidemia [odds ratio (OR) = 0.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07–0.4; OR = 4, 95% CI 1.3–11; and OR = 4, 95% CI 1.5–12, respectively]. Conclusion: Underweight, recent cephalosporin exposure, and CVCs were statistically significant predictors of candidemia in the IMW. Using these predictors might aid in recognizing high-risk patients for candidemia in the IMWs, leading to earlier appropriate empirical treatment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)80-83
Number of pages4
JournalDiagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease
Volume95
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 2019

Keywords

  • Candidemia
  • Medical wards
  • Predictors

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Predicting candidemia in the internal medicine wards: a comparison with gram-negative bacteremia—a retrospectives study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this