Positive tip culture with Candida and negative blood culture: to treat or not to treat? A systematic review with meta-analysis.

Bernardo Machado De Almeida, Giovanni L Breda, Flavio Queiroz-Telles, Felipe F Tuon
{"title":"Positive tip culture with Candida and negative blood culture: to treat or not to treat? A systematic review with meta-analysis.","authors":"Bernardo Machado De Almeida,&nbsp;Giovanni L Breda,&nbsp;Flavio Queiroz-Telles,&nbsp;Felipe F Tuon","doi":"10.3109/00365548.2014.952246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Invasive candidiasis is a major invasive fungal infection. It has high lethality, and even higher if not treated early. There is no consensus on antifungal treatment in patients with positive catheter tip culture for Candida spp. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of antifungal therapy and mortality of patients with positive culture for Candida spp. in catheter tip that have negative blood culture.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The PubMed database was searched to identify articles related to Candida and catheter. Articles with adequate data were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1208 studies initially screened, 5 met the selection criteria. All were retrospective studies. In all, 265 patients were evaluated for outcomes 'candidemia' and 'invasive candidiasis' and 158 for the outcome 'mortality.' Antifungal therapy had no impact on the development of invasive fungal disease (Odds ratio (OR) = 1.41; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-3.52). Also there was no benefit of therapy on mortality (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.54-1.95).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Due to the poor quality of the studies no conclusion can be made. Randomized prospective studies are needed to better evaluate this therapeutic strategy.</p>","PeriodicalId":21541,"journal":{"name":"Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.3109/00365548.2014.952246","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scandinavian Journal of Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3109/00365548.2014.952246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/10/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background: Invasive candidiasis is a major invasive fungal infection. It has high lethality, and even higher if not treated early. There is no consensus on antifungal treatment in patients with positive catheter tip culture for Candida spp. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of antifungal therapy and mortality of patients with positive culture for Candida spp. in catheter tip that have negative blood culture.

Methods: The PubMed database was searched to identify articles related to Candida and catheter. Articles with adequate data were included.

Results: Of 1208 studies initially screened, 5 met the selection criteria. All were retrospective studies. In all, 265 patients were evaluated for outcomes 'candidemia' and 'invasive candidiasis' and 158 for the outcome 'mortality.' Antifungal therapy had no impact on the development of invasive fungal disease (Odds ratio (OR) = 1.41; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.56-3.52). Also there was no benefit of therapy on mortality (OR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.54-1.95).

Conclusion: Due to the poor quality of the studies no conclusion can be made. Randomized prospective studies are needed to better evaluate this therapeutic strategy.

念珠菌针尖阳性培养与血培养阴性:治疗还是不治疗?荟萃分析的系统综述。
背景:侵袭性念珠菌病是一种主要的侵袭性真菌感染。它具有很高的致死率,如果不及早治疗甚至更高。导管尖端念珠菌培养阳性患者的抗真菌治疗尚无共识。本研究的目的是评估抗真菌治疗对血液培养阴性的导管尖端念珠菌培养阳性患者的影响和死亡率。方法:检索PubMed数据库中与念珠菌和导管相关的文献。纳入了资料充分的文章。结果:在最初筛选的1208项研究中,有5项符合选择标准。所有研究均为回顾性研究。总共有265名患者被评估为“念珠菌病”和“侵袭性念珠菌病”,158名患者被评估为“死亡率”。抗真菌治疗对侵袭性真菌病的发展无影响(优势比(OR) = 1.41;95%置信区间(CI) = 0.56-3.52)。此外,治疗对死亡率也没有益处(OR = 1.02;95% ci = 0.54-1.95)。结论:由于研究质量较差,无法得出结论。需要随机前瞻性研究来更好地评估这种治疗策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信