Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 405

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A multicentre observational study on the epidemiology, risk factors, management and outcomes of mucormycosis in India

Open access
Patel, A., Kaur, H., Xess, I., Michael, J.S., Savio, J., Rudramurthy, S., Singh, R., Shastri, P., Umabala, P., Sardana, R., Kindo, A., Capoor, M.R., Mohan, S., Muthu, V., Agarwal, R., Chakrabarti, A.·2020·Clinical Microbiology and Infection

Abstract

OBJECTIVES To describe the epidemiology, management, and outcome of subjects with mucormycosis; and, to evaluate the risk factors associated with mortality. METHODS We conducted a prospective observational study involving consecutive subjects with proven mucormycosis across 12 centers from India. The demographic profile, microbiology, predisposing factors, management, and 90-day mortality were recorded; risk factors for mortality were analyzed. RESULTS We included 465 subjects. Rhino-orbital mucormycosis was the most common (315/465, 67.7%) presentation followed by pulmonary (62/465, 13.3%), cutaneous (49/465, 10.5%), and others. The predisposing factors included diabetes mellitus (342/465, 73.5%), malignancy (42/465, 9.0%), transplant (36/465, 7.7%), and others. Rhizopus species (231/290, 79.7%) were the most common followed by Apophysomyces variabilis (23/290, 7.9%), and several rare Mucorales. Surgical treatment was performed in 62.2% (289/465) of the subjects. Amphotericin B was the primary therapy in 81.9% (381/465), while posaconazole was used as combination therapy in 53 (11.4%) subjects. Antifungal therapy was inappropriate in 7.6% (30/394) of the subjects. The 90-day mortality rate was 52% (242/465). On multivariate analysis, disseminated and rhino-orbital (with cerebral extension) mucormycosis, shorter duration of symptoms, shorter duration of antifungal therapy, and treatment with amphotericin B deoxycholate (vs. liposomal) were independent risk factors of mortality. A combined medical and surgical management was associated with a better survival. CONCLUSIONS Diabetes mellitus was the dominant predisposing factor in all forms of mucormycosis. Combined surgical and medical management was associated with better outcomes. Several gaps surfaced in the management of mucormycosis. The rarer Mucorales identified in the study warrant further evaluation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cmi.2019.11.021

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 405

Metadata

Authors
Patel, A., Kaur, H., Xess, I., Michael, J. S., Savio, J., Rudramurthy, S., Singh, R., Shastri, P., Umabala, P., Sardana, R., Kindo, A., Capoor, M. R., Mohan, S., Muthu, V., Agarwal, R., & Chakrabarti, A.
Venue
Clinical Microbiology and Infection
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-07
Volume
26
Issue
7
Pages
944.e9-944.e15
ISSN
1198-743X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2993195785
Cited by
405
References
0
FWCI
36.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A multicentre observational study on the epidemiology, risk factors, management and outcomes of mucormycosis in India. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.cmi.2019.11.021
The paper
Patel, A., Kaur, H., Xess, I., Michael, J. S., Savio, J., Rudramurthy, S., Singh, R., Shastri, P., Umabala, P., Sardana, R., Kindo, A., Capoor, M. R., Mohan, S., Muthu, V., Agarwal, R., & Chakrabarti, A. (2020). A multicentre observational study on the epidemiology, risk factors, management and outcomes of mucormycosis in India. Clinical Microbiology and Infection. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmi.2019.11.021

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.