4.5 Article

A prospective study of fungal biomarkers to improve management of invasive fungal diseases in a mixed specialty critical care unit

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRITICAL CARE
Volume 40, Issue -, Pages 119-127

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.03.025

Keywords

Invasive fungal disease; Critical care patients; Fungal biomarkers; (1-3)-beta-d-glucan; Galactomannan

Funding

  1. Department of Clinical Microbiology Trinity College Dublin
  2. Pfizer Healthcare Ireland

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The diagnosis of invasive fungal diseases (IFD) in critical care patients (CrCP) is difficult. The study investigated the performance of a set of biomarkers for diagnosis of IFD in a mixed specialty critical care unit (CrCU). Methods: A prospective observational study in patients receiving critical care for >= 7 days was performed. Serum samples were tested for the presence of: (1-3) -beta-D-glucan (BDG), galactomannan (GM), and Aspergillus fumigatus DNA. GM antigen detection was also performed on bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples. The patients were classified using published definitions for IFD and a diagnostic algorithm for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis. Performance parameters of the assays were determined. Results: In patients with proven and probable IFD, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of a single positive BDG were 63%, 83%, 65% and 83% respectively. Specificity increased to 86% with 2 consecutive positive results. The mean BDG value of patients with proven and probable IFD was significantly higher compared to those with fungal colonization and no IFD (p value < 0.0001). Conclusion: New diagnostic criteria which incorporate these biomarkers, in particular BDG, and host factors unique to critical care patients should enhance diagnosis of IFD and positively impact antifungal stewardship programs. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available