• J. Clin. Microbiol. · Feb 2020

    Evaluation of a Rapid Fungal Detection Panel for Identification of Candidemia at an Academic Medical Center.

    • John P Bomkamp, Rand Sulaiman, Jennifer L Hartwell, Armisha Desai, Vera C Winn, Justin Wrin, Michelle L Kussin, and Jon J Hiles.
    • Indiana University Health, Adult Academic Health Center, Department of Pharmacy, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA.
    • J. Clin. Microbiol. 2020 Feb 24; 58 (3).

    AbstractThis study was conducted to assess the utility of the T2Candida panel across an academic health center and identify potential areas for diagnostic optimization. A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with a T2Candida panel and mycolytic/fungal (myco/f lytic) blood culture collected simultaneously during hospitalizations from February 2017 to March 2018. The primary outcome of this study was to determine the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of the panel compared to myco/f lytic blood culture. Secondary outcomes included Candida species isolated from culture or detected on the panel, source of infection, days of therapy (DOT) of antifungals in patients with discordant results, and overall antifungal DOT/1,000 patient days. A total of 433 paired T2Candida panel and myco/f lytic blood cultures were identified. The pretest likelihood of candidemia was 4.4%. The sensitivity and specificity were 64.7% and 95.6%, respectively. The positive and negative predictive values were 40.7% and 98.5%, respectively. There were 16 patients with T2Candida panel positive and myco/f lytic blood culture negative results, while 6 patients had T2Candida panel negative and myco/f blood culture positive results. The overall antifungal DOT/1,000 patient days was improved after implementation of the T2Candida panel; however, the use of micafungin continued to decline after the panel was removed. We found that the T2Candida panel is a highly specific diagnostic tool; however, the sensitivity and positive predictive value may be lower than previously reported when employed in clinical practice. Clinicians should use this panel as an adjunct to blood cultures when making a definitive diagnosis of candidemia.Copyright © 2020 American Society for Microbiology.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.