Gilberto Gambero Gaspar1, Mayra Gonçalves Menegueti2, Maria Auxiliadora-Martins3, Anibal Basile-Filho3, Roberto Martinez1. 1. Departamento de Medicina Interna, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. 2. Comissão de Controle de Infeccção Hospitalar, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil. 3. Unidade de Terapia Intensiva, Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto, Universidade de São Paulo, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate predictive indices for candidemia in an adult intensive care unit (ICU) and to propose a new index. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted between January 2011 and December 2012. This study was performed in an ICU in a tertiary care hospital at a public university and included 114 patients staying in the adult ICU for at least 48 hours. The association of patient variables with candidemia was analyzed. RESULTS: There were 18 (15.8%) proven cases of candidemia and 96 (84.2%) cases without candidemia. Univariate analysis revealed the following risk factors: parenteral nutrition, severe sepsis, surgical procedure, dialysis, pancreatitis, acute renal failure, and an APACHE II score higher than 20. For the Candida score index, the odds ratio was 8.50 (95% CI, 2.57 to 28.09); the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 0.78, 0.71, 0.33, and 0.94, respectively. With respect to the clinical predictor index, the odds ratio was 9.45 (95%CI, 2.06 to 43.39); the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 0.89, 0.54, 0.27, and 0.96, respectively. The proposed candidemia index cutoff was 8.5; the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 0.77, 0.70, 0.33, and 0.94, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Candida score and clinical predictor index excluded candidemia satisfactorily. The effectiveness of the candidemia index was comparable to that of the Candida score.
INTRODUCTION: To evaluate predictive indices for candidemia in an adult intensive care unit (ICU) and to propose a new index. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted between January 2011 and December 2012. This study was performed in an ICU in a tertiary care hospital at a public university and included 114 patients staying in the adult ICU for at least 48 hours. The association of patient variables with candidemia was analyzed. RESULTS: There were 18 (15.8%) proven cases of candidemia and 96 (84.2%) cases without candidemia. Univariate analysis revealed the following risk factors: parenteral nutrition, severe sepsis, surgical procedure, dialysis, pancreatitis, acute renal failure, and an APACHE II score higher than 20. For the Candida score index, the odds ratio was 8.50 (95% CI, 2.57 to 28.09); the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 0.78, 0.71, 0.33, and 0.94, respectively. With respect to the clinical predictor index, the odds ratio was 9.45 (95%CI, 2.06 to 43.39); the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 0.89, 0.54, 0.27, and 0.96, respectively. The proposed candidemia index cutoff was 8.5; the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 0.77, 0.70, 0.33, and 0.94, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The Candida score and clinical predictor index excluded candidemia satisfactorily. The effectiveness of the candidemia index was comparable to that of the Candida score.