中性粒细胞减少仍然是侵袭性曲霉病的主要危险因素吗?当代大学医院中性粒细胞减少和非中性粒细胞减少患者侵袭性曲霉病回顾性队列分析。

IF 4.6 2区 医学 Q1 MICROBIOLOGY
Andrea Gutiérrez-Villanueva, Itziar Diego-Yagüe, Isabel Gutiérrez-Martín, Sonia García-Prieto, Edith Gutiérrez-Abreu, Román Fernández-Guitián, Isabel Castilla-Martínez, Naomi Bermejo-Moreno, Nuria Miguel-Ontañon, Jorge Calderón-Parra, Alejandro Callejas-Díaz, Alberto Díaz-de Santiago, Sara de la Fuente-Moral, Elena Múñez-Rubio, Sarela García-Masedo, Isabel Sánchez-Romero, Antonio Ramos-Martínez, Ana Fernández-Cruz
{"title":"中性粒细胞减少仍然是侵袭性曲霉病的主要危险因素吗?当代大学医院中性粒细胞减少和非中性粒细胞减少患者侵袭性曲霉病回顾性队列分析。","authors":"Andrea Gutiérrez-Villanueva, Itziar Diego-Yagüe, Isabel Gutiérrez-Martín, Sonia García-Prieto, Edith Gutiérrez-Abreu, Román Fernández-Guitián, Isabel Castilla-Martínez, Naomi Bermejo-Moreno, Nuria Miguel-Ontañon, Jorge Calderón-Parra, Alejandro Callejas-Díaz, Alberto Díaz-de Santiago, Sara de la Fuente-Moral, Elena Múñez-Rubio, Sarela García-Masedo, Isabel Sánchez-Romero, Antonio Ramos-Martínez, Ana Fernández-Cruz","doi":"10.1186/s12941-025-00794-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In times of mold active prophylaxis, invasive aspergillosis (IA) epidemiology is evolving. Presentation in non-neutropenic may differ from neutropenic. We investigated the cases of IA in our center with a focus on differences between neutropenic and non-neutropenic, and analyzed the impact of cryptic and non-fumigatus Aspergillus species.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective observational study including all adult patients admitted to the Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda Hospital between January 2018 and April 2024 with IA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>112 IA were identified. Only 11 (9.8%) had neutropenia as risk factor for IA. Most frequent risk factors were corticosteroids (77.2%), SOT (46.5%), SARS-CoV2 (29.7%) and CMV replication (28.7%). 89.3% were pulmonary IA with 6 cases (5.4%) of disseminated infection. A. fumigatus was the most frequent species 48 (51.6%). 13 cases (14%) were caused by cryptic Aspergillus spp. Non-neutropenic patients, compared to neutropenic patients, were more likely to have positive fungal cultures (83.2% versus 54.5%, p = 0.023[NS]), and not to present a halo sign (7.4% versus 45.5%, p = 0.003 [NS]). In addition, in non-neutropenic patients, compared to neutropenic patients, there was a trend towards a greater probability of positive GM from BAL (81.3% versus 66.7%, p = 0.304) and a trend towards a lower probability of positive serum GM (25.7% versus 45.5%, p = 0.137). 41/112 (36.6%) cases presented breakthrough IFI and in 51.2%, (21/41 cases), the isolate was resistant to the prior antifungal. One presented A. fumigatus with the TR34-L98H mutation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Risk factors different than neutropenia are currently the most common in IA. The clinical presentation in non-neutropenic patients differs from neutropenic. Resistance to antifungals is emerging especially in breakthrough IA.</p>","PeriodicalId":8052,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials","volume":"24 1","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12032692/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is neutropenia still the main risk factor for invasive aspergillosis? A contemporary university hospital retrospective cohort of invasive aspergillosis in neutropenic and non-neutropenic patients.\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Gutiérrez-Villanueva, Itziar Diego-Yagüe, Isabel Gutiérrez-Martín, Sonia García-Prieto, Edith Gutiérrez-Abreu, Román Fernández-Guitián, Isabel Castilla-Martínez, Naomi Bermejo-Moreno, Nuria Miguel-Ontañon, Jorge Calderón-Parra, Alejandro Callejas-Díaz, Alberto Díaz-de Santiago, Sara de la Fuente-Moral, Elena Múñez-Rubio, Sarela García-Masedo, Isabel Sánchez-Romero, Antonio Ramos-Martínez, Ana Fernández-Cruz\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12941-025-00794-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In times of mold active prophylaxis, invasive aspergillosis (IA) epidemiology is evolving. Presentation in non-neutropenic may differ from neutropenic. We investigated the cases of IA in our center with a focus on differences between neutropenic and non-neutropenic, and analyzed the impact of cryptic and non-fumigatus Aspergillus species.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective observational study including all adult patients admitted to the Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda Hospital between January 2018 and April 2024 with IA.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>112 IA were identified. Only 11 (9.8%) had neutropenia as risk factor for IA. Most frequent risk factors were corticosteroids (77.2%), SOT (46.5%), SARS-CoV2 (29.7%) and CMV replication (28.7%). 89.3% were pulmonary IA with 6 cases (5.4%) of disseminated infection. A. fumigatus was the most frequent species 48 (51.6%). 13 cases (14%) were caused by cryptic Aspergillus spp. Non-neutropenic patients, compared to neutropenic patients, were more likely to have positive fungal cultures (83.2% versus 54.5%, p = 0.023[NS]), and not to present a halo sign (7.4% versus 45.5%, p = 0.003 [NS]). In addition, in non-neutropenic patients, compared to neutropenic patients, there was a trend towards a greater probability of positive GM from BAL (81.3% versus 66.7%, p = 0.304) and a trend towards a lower probability of positive serum GM (25.7% versus 45.5%, p = 0.137). 41/112 (36.6%) cases presented breakthrough IFI and in 51.2%, (21/41 cases), the isolate was resistant to the prior antifungal. One presented A. fumigatus with the TR34-L98H mutation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Risk factors different than neutropenia are currently the most common in IA. The clinical presentation in non-neutropenic patients differs from neutropenic. Resistance to antifungals is emerging especially in breakthrough IA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12032692/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-025-00794-8\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MICROBIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-025-00794-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MICROBIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在霉菌积极预防的时代,侵袭性曲霉病(IA)流行病学正在发展。非中性粒细胞减少症的表现可能与中性粒细胞减少症不同。我们调查了本中心的IA病例,重点分析了中性粒细胞减少和非中性粒细胞减少的差异,并分析了隐曲霉和非烟曲霉种类的影响。方法:回顾性观察研究,纳入2018年1月至2024年4月在Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda医院收治的所有IA成年患者。结果:鉴定出112个IA。只有11人(9.8%)有中性粒细胞减少症作为IA的危险因素。最常见的危险因素是皮质类固醇(77.2%)、SOT(46.5%)、SARS-CoV2(29.7%)和CMV复制(28.7%)。肺部感染占89.3%,弥散性感染6例(5.4%)。烟螨以48种(51.6%)居多。13例(14%)由隐曲霉引起。与中性粒细胞减少患者相比,非中性粒细胞减少患者更有可能出现真菌培养阳性(83.2%对54.5%,p = 0.023[NS]),并且不出现晕征(7.4%对45.5%,p = 0.003 [NS])。此外,在非中性粒细胞减少患者中,与中性粒细胞减少患者相比,BAL中GM阳性的概率更大(81.3%对66.7%,p = 0.304),血清GM阳性的概率更低(25.7%对45.5%,p = 0.137)。41/112(36.6%)病例出现IFI突破,51.2%(21/41)病例对原有抗真菌药物耐药。一份报告显示烟曲霉携带TR34-L98H突变。结论:不同于中性粒细胞减少症的危险因素目前在IA中最为常见。非中性粒细胞减少症患者的临床表现与中性粒细胞减少症不同。对抗真菌药物的耐药性正在出现,特别是在突破性的IA中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is neutropenia still the main risk factor for invasive aspergillosis? A contemporary university hospital retrospective cohort of invasive aspergillosis in neutropenic and non-neutropenic patients.

Introduction: In times of mold active prophylaxis, invasive aspergillosis (IA) epidemiology is evolving. Presentation in non-neutropenic may differ from neutropenic. We investigated the cases of IA in our center with a focus on differences between neutropenic and non-neutropenic, and analyzed the impact of cryptic and non-fumigatus Aspergillus species.

Methods: Retrospective observational study including all adult patients admitted to the Puerta de Hierro-Majadahonda Hospital between January 2018 and April 2024 with IA.

Results: 112 IA were identified. Only 11 (9.8%) had neutropenia as risk factor for IA. Most frequent risk factors were corticosteroids (77.2%), SOT (46.5%), SARS-CoV2 (29.7%) and CMV replication (28.7%). 89.3% were pulmonary IA with 6 cases (5.4%) of disseminated infection. A. fumigatus was the most frequent species 48 (51.6%). 13 cases (14%) were caused by cryptic Aspergillus spp. Non-neutropenic patients, compared to neutropenic patients, were more likely to have positive fungal cultures (83.2% versus 54.5%, p = 0.023[NS]), and not to present a halo sign (7.4% versus 45.5%, p = 0.003 [NS]). In addition, in non-neutropenic patients, compared to neutropenic patients, there was a trend towards a greater probability of positive GM from BAL (81.3% versus 66.7%, p = 0.304) and a trend towards a lower probability of positive serum GM (25.7% versus 45.5%, p = 0.137). 41/112 (36.6%) cases presented breakthrough IFI and in 51.2%, (21/41 cases), the isolate was resistant to the prior antifungal. One presented A. fumigatus with the TR34-L98H mutation.

Conclusion: Risk factors different than neutropenia are currently the most common in IA. The clinical presentation in non-neutropenic patients differs from neutropenic. Resistance to antifungals is emerging especially in breakthrough IA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials considers good quality, novel and international research of more than regional relevance. Research must include epidemiological and/or clinical information about isolates, and the journal covers the clinical microbiology of bacteria, viruses and fungi, as well as antimicrobial treatment of infectious diseases. Annals of Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobials is an open access, peer-reviewed journal focusing on information concerning clinical microbiology, infectious diseases and antimicrobials. The management of infectious disease is dependent on correct diagnosis and appropriate antimicrobial treatment, and with this in mind, the journal aims to improve the communication between laboratory and clinical science in the field of clinical microbiology and antimicrobial treatment. Furthermore, the journal has no restrictions on space or access; this ensures that the journal can reach the widest possible audience.
×
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