Cited by 103Antifungal resistance and susceptibilityYeasts and Rust Fungi StudiesOcular Infections and Treatments

Candida auris candidaemia in an intensive care unit - Prospective observational study to evaluate epidemiology, risk factors, and outcome

Shastri, Prakash S., Shankarnarayan, Shamanth A., Oberoi, Jaswinder, Rudramurthy, Shivaprakash M., Wattal, Chand, Chakrabarti, Arunaloke·2020·Journal of Critical Care

Abstract

Purpose To determine the prevalence of Candida auris candidaemia in our ICU patients and its molecular epidemiology. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted on candidaemia in our ICU patients over 18 months during 2016-2017. Demographics, underlying disease, risk factors, antifungal therapy and outcome were studied. Risk factors of C. auris and non-auris candidaemia were compared. Results During the study period, among 108 candidaemia cases recorded, the incidence was 6.75/1000 ICU bed days. C. auris topped the list (n = 42, 39.9%), followed by C. tropicalis (34.3%), and C. parapsilosis (15.7%). On bivariate analysis prior antibiotic therapy, long central line days, mechanical ventilation and length of ICU stay were significant risk factors for C. auris candidaemia compared to non-auris candidaemia. Multivariate analysis showed underlying respiratory and neurological diseases as significantly associated with risk of C. auris candidaemia. Fluconazole, amphotericin B, and caspofungin resistance were noted in 97.0%, 93.7% and 3% of C. auris isolates respectively. Conclusion Longer duration of central line days, prior antibiotic use, mechanical ventilation and prolonged ICU stay were important risk factors associated with C. auris candidaemia along with underlying respiratory or neurological disease. The isolates are non-clonal in origin, but they belong to a single clade.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcrc.2020.01.004

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shastri, P. S., Shankarnarayan, S. A., Oberoi, J., Rudramurthy, S. M., Wattal, C., & Chakrabarti, A.
Affiliations
  • Sir Ganga Ram Hospital (IN)
  • Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (IN)
Corresponding author
Shastri, Prakash S.
Venue
Journal of Critical Care
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-06
Volume
57
Pages
42-48
ISSN
0883-9441 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2999456531
Cited by
103
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5
FWCI
1.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Critical Care (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antifungal resistance and susceptibility
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Yeasts and Rust Fungi Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ocular Infections and Treatments
Keywords
Candida auris, candidemia, intensive care unit, risk factors, molecular epidemiology, Candida tropicalis, Candida parapsilosis, antifungal resistance, fluconazole resistance, amphotericin B resistance, caspofungin, prior antibiotic use, mechanical ventilation, ICU length of stay, respiratory diseases, neurological disorders, clonal origin
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Amphotericin B, Antifungal Agents, Candida, Female, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Length of Stay, Male, Middle Aged, Phylogeny, Prospective Studies, Respiration, Artificial, Risk Factors, Fluconazole, Incidence, Prevalence, Treatment Outcome, Amplified Fragment Length Polymorphism Analysis, Candidemia, Molecular Typing

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