Search

Necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTI) have been recognized for millennia and continue to impose considerable burden on both patient and society in terms of morbidity, death, and the allocation of resources. With improvements in the delivery of critical care, outcomes have improved, although disease-specific therapies are lacking. The basic principles of early diagnosis, of prompt and broad antimicrobial therapy, and of aggressive debridement have remained unchanged. Clearly novel and new therapeutics are needed to combat this persistently lethal disease. This review emphasizes the pillars of NSTI management and then summarizes the contemporary evidence supporting the incorporation of novel adjuncts to the pharmacologic and operative foundations of managing this disease.

Background Diagnosis of invasive candidiasis (IC) is limited by insensitivity and slow turnaround of cultures. Our objectives were to define the performance of T2Candida, a nonculture test, under guidance of a diagnostic stewardship program, and evaluate impact on time to antifungal initiation and antifungal utilization. Methods This was a retrospective study of adult medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients with septic shock for whom T2Candida testing was performed from March 2017 to March 2020. Patients with positive T2Candida results during this period were compared to MICU patients who did not undergo T2Candida testing but had septic shock and blood cultures positive for Candida from January 2016 through March 2020. Results Overall, 155 T2Candida tests from 143 patients were included. Nine percent of T2Candida tests were positive compared to 4.5% of blood cultures. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of T2Candida for proven and probable IC were 78%, 95%, 50%, and 99%, respectively. Patients who tested positive for T2Candida (n = 14) were diagnosed earlier and initiated on antifungal therapy sooner than patients with IC (n = 14) diagnosed by blood culture alone (median, 5.6 vs 60 hours; P <.0001). Median antifungal days of therapy/1000 patient-days were 23.3/month preimplementation and 15/month postimplementation (P   =.007). Following a negative T2Candida result, empiric antifungals were either not administered in 58% or discontinued within 72 hours in 96% of patients. Conclusions Diagnostic stewardship guided T2Candida testing resulted in reduced time to IC diagnosis, faster initiation of antifungal therapy, and lower antifungal usage among MICU patients with septic shock. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Invasive fungal infections (IFIs) are common following lung transplantation. Isavuconazole is unstudied as prophylaxis in organ transplant recipients. We compared effectiveness and tolerability of isavuconazole and voriconazole prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients. Methods A single-center, retrospective study of patients who received isavuconazole (September 2015–February 2018) or voriconazole (September 2013–September 2015) for antifungal prophylaxis. IFIs were defined by EORTC/MSG criteria. Results Patients received isavuconazole (n = 144) or voriconazole (n = 156) for median 3.4 and 3.1 months, respectively. Adjunctive inhaled amphotericin B (iAmB) was administered to 100% and 41% of patients in the respective groups. At 1 year, 8% of patients receiving isavuconazole or voriconazole developed IFIs. For both groups, 70% and 30% of IFIs were caused by molds and yeasts, respectively, and breakthrough IFI (bIFI) rate was 3%. Outcomes did not significantly differ for patients receiving or not receiving iAmB. Independent risk factors for bIFI and breakthrough invasive mold infection (bIMI) were mold-positive respiratory culture and red blood cell transfusion >7 units at transplant. Bronchial necrosis >2 cm from anastomosis and basiliximab induction were also independent risk factors for bIMI. Isavuconazole and voriconazole were discontinued prematurely due to adverse events in 11% and 36% of patients, respectively (P  = .0001). Most common causes of voriconazole and isavuconazole discontinuation were hepatotoxicity and lack of oral intake, respectively. Patients receiving ≥90 days prophylaxis had fewer IFIs at 1 year (3% vs 9%, P  = .02). IFIs were associated with increased mortality (P  = .0001) and longer hospitalizations (P  = .0005). Conclusions Isavuconazole was effective and well tolerated as antifungal prophylaxis following lung transplantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The optimum trough concentration of voriconazole for clinical response and safety is controversial. The objective of this review was to determine the optimum trough concentration of voriconazole and evaluate its relationship with efficacy and safety.Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the Cochrane Library and three Chinese literature databases were searched. Observational studies that compared clinical outcomes below and above the trough concentration cut-off value were included. We set the trough concentration cut-off value for efficacy as 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 3.0 mg/L and for safety as 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 5.5 and 6.0 mg/L. The efficacy outcomes were invasive fungal infection-related mortality, all-cause mortality, rate of successful treatment and rate of prophylaxis failure. The safety outcomes included incidents of hepatotoxicity, neurotoxicity and visual disorders.Results: A total of 21 studies involving 1158 patients were included. Compared with voriconazole trough concentrations of >0.5 mg/L, levels of <0.5 mg/L significantly decreased the rate of treatment success (risk ratio = 0.46, 95% CI 0.29-0.74). The incidence of hepatotoxicity was significantly increased with trough concentrations >3.0, >4.0, >5.5 and >6.0 mg/L. The incidence of neurotoxicity was significantly increased with trough concentrations >4.0 and >5.5 mg/L.Conclusions: A voriconazole level of 0.5 mg/L should be considered the lower threshold associated with efficacy. A trough concentration >3.0 mg/L is associated with increased hepatotoxicity, particularly for the Asian population, and >4.0 mg/L is associated with increased neurotoxicity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]