Cargando…

1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia

BACKGROUND: The incidence of Candida bloodstream infections has risen over the last several decades. Complications of candidemia include endogenous fungal endophthalmitis which can result in devastating outcomes including vision loss. In 2015, the IDSA guidelines were updated to recommend echinocand...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hillenbrand, Molly, Apewokin, Senu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776898/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1352
_version_ 1783630788180312064
author Hillenbrand, Molly
Apewokin, Senu
author_facet Hillenbrand, Molly
Apewokin, Senu
author_sort Hillenbrand, Molly
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The incidence of Candida bloodstream infections has risen over the last several decades. Complications of candidemia include endogenous fungal endophthalmitis which can result in devastating outcomes including vision loss. In 2015, the IDSA guidelines were updated to recommend echinocandins as initial therapy for candidemia. Given the poor ocular penetration of echinocandins there has been some concern this change may portend an increased incidence of ocular complications in candidemic patients. We sought to examine whether patients who received empiric echinocandin therapy developed higher rates of ophthalmic complications of candidemia. METHODS: We identified patients in our healthcare system who had blood cultures positive for Candida species and a completed ophthalmology consult between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2019. Chi-squared analysis was used to compare antifungal prescribing patterns before and after release of the updated IDSA guidelines. We assessed whether the switch to empiric echinocandin therapy as directed by the guidelines was associated with higher rates of abnormal eye exams. RESULTS: 47 patients treated before the guideline change were compared to 57 patients treated after the guideline change. There was no significant difference in age, gender, or comorbid diabetes and hypertension between the groups. Before the guideline change, 24/47 (51%) of patients received eye-penetrating antifungals. This decreased to 21/57 after the updated guideline (37%, p=0.21). The percentage of patients with positive eye exams was nearly equal before and after the updated guidelines, 10/47 (21%) before vs 13/57 (22%) after (p=1). After the guideline change, 7/21 (33%) of the patients treated with penetrating antifungals had positive eye exams vs 6/36 (16%) who received echinocandins (p=0.19). CONCLUSION: Echinocandins are known to have poor ocular penetration yet our data demonstrate no change in the incidence of ophthalmic complications of candidemia after the 2016 guideline endorsed echinocandins as empiric therapy. The prevalence of positive eye exams throughout our study period was 22%, suggesting ongoing utility for these exams. Ongoing investigation is necessary to confirm and further study these findings. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7776898
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77768982021-01-07 1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia Hillenbrand, Molly Apewokin, Senu Open Forum Infect Dis Poster Abstracts BACKGROUND: The incidence of Candida bloodstream infections has risen over the last several decades. Complications of candidemia include endogenous fungal endophthalmitis which can result in devastating outcomes including vision loss. In 2015, the IDSA guidelines were updated to recommend echinocandins as initial therapy for candidemia. Given the poor ocular penetration of echinocandins there has been some concern this change may portend an increased incidence of ocular complications in candidemic patients. We sought to examine whether patients who received empiric echinocandin therapy developed higher rates of ophthalmic complications of candidemia. METHODS: We identified patients in our healthcare system who had blood cultures positive for Candida species and a completed ophthalmology consult between January 1, 2014 and April 30, 2019. Chi-squared analysis was used to compare antifungal prescribing patterns before and after release of the updated IDSA guidelines. We assessed whether the switch to empiric echinocandin therapy as directed by the guidelines was associated with higher rates of abnormal eye exams. RESULTS: 47 patients treated before the guideline change were compared to 57 patients treated after the guideline change. There was no significant difference in age, gender, or comorbid diabetes and hypertension between the groups. Before the guideline change, 24/47 (51%) of patients received eye-penetrating antifungals. This decreased to 21/57 after the updated guideline (37%, p=0.21). The percentage of patients with positive eye exams was nearly equal before and after the updated guidelines, 10/47 (21%) before vs 13/57 (22%) after (p=1). After the guideline change, 7/21 (33%) of the patients treated with penetrating antifungals had positive eye exams vs 6/36 (16%) who received echinocandins (p=0.19). CONCLUSION: Echinocandins are known to have poor ocular penetration yet our data demonstrate no change in the incidence of ophthalmic complications of candidemia after the 2016 guideline endorsed echinocandins as empiric therapy. The prevalence of positive eye exams throughout our study period was 22%, suggesting ongoing utility for these exams. Ongoing investigation is necessary to confirm and further study these findings. DISCLOSURES: All Authors: No reported disclosures Oxford University Press 2020-12-31 /pmc/articles/PMC7776898/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1352 Text en © The Author 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Poster Abstracts
Hillenbrand, Molly
Apewokin, Senu
1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia
title 1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia
title_full 1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia
title_fullStr 1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia
title_full_unstemmed 1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia
title_short 1166. Evaluating the Impact of the 2016 Candidemia Guidelines on the Incidence of Ocular Complications of Candidemia
title_sort 1166. evaluating the impact of the 2016 candidemia guidelines on the incidence of ocular complications of candidemia
topic Poster Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7776898/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1352
work_keys_str_mv AT hillenbrandmolly 1166evaluatingtheimpactofthe2016candidemiaguidelinesontheincidenceofocularcomplicationsofcandidemia
AT apewokinsenu 1166evaluatingtheimpactofthe2016candidemiaguidelinesontheincidenceofocularcomplicationsofcandidemia