• Zhonghua yi xue za zhi · Aug 2016

    Comparative Study

    [Comparison between micafungin and caspofungin for the empirical treatment of severe intra-abdominal infections in surgical intensive care patients].

    • T Yan, S L Li, and D X Wang.
    • Department of Critical Care Medicine, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China.
    • Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2016 Aug 2; 96 (29): 2301-6.

    ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of micafungin with caspofungin for the empirical treatment of severe intra-abdominal infections in surgical intensive care patients.MethodThis was a retrospective cohort study.From May 1 st 2012 to April 30 2015, 47 patients with severe intra-abdominal infection complicated with specific risk of Intra-abdominal invasive candidiasis (IAC) receiving empirical treatment of echinocandins were enrolled in Department of Critical Care Medicine, Peking University First Hospital. Micafungin and caspofungin substituted each other every six months. The baseline information, risk factors of IAC, characteristics of intra-abdominal infections, antifungal treatment and other intra-abdominal infections(IAI) related treatment information, clinical outcome were collected and compared between the micafungin and caspofungin groups.ResultForty-seven patients met inclusion/exclusion criteria. The average score of APACHE Ⅱ was (19.0±7.7), the incidence of IAC was 23.4%. The patients were divided into the micafungin group (n=26) and the caspofungin group (n=21). The average therapeutic course was 10 (5, 13) days.There were no significant differences in the baseline information, risk factors of IAC, characteristics of intra-abdominal infections and other IAI related treatment informations between the two groups. SOFA score, body temperature, persistence of extra-gastrointestinal fungal colonization significantly improved from the baseline in both groups. The leukocyte count decrease was different between the micafungin group and the caspofungin group respectively[(12.5±5.4)10(9)/L vs (9.8±4.3) 10(9)/L, P=0.013; (12.9±5.4) 10(9)/L vs (10.4±4.7) 10(9)/L, P=0.134]. There were no significantly differences in the recovery of GI function, the incidence of breakthrough IC, the incidence of newly developed organ failure, the 30-day mortality, the length of ICU stay and hospitalization period or the incidence of alternative antifungal therapy between the micafungin group and the caspofungin group. No drug-related adverse event requiring echinocandins discontinuation occurred.ConclusionThe empirical treatment of echinocandins for patients with severe intra-abdominal infection and specific risk factors of IAC may be effective. The empirical treatment of micafungin and caspofungin were equally effective and safe.

      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…