Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39379339›Full record

SynthesisMycoses2024

Candidemia Following Severe COVID-19 in Hospitalised and Critical Ill Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Karan Srisurapanont, Bhoowit Lerttiendamrong, Tanaporn Meejun, Jaedvara Thanakitcharu, Kasama Manothummetha, Achitpol Thongkam, Nipat Chuleerarux, Anawin Sanguankeo, Lucy X Li, Surachai Leksuwankun and 8 more

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Mycoses, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors.

Karan SrisurapanontFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9296-6344
Bhoowit LerttiendamrongFaculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0143-6407
Tanaporn MeejunFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9544-7096
Jaedvara ThanakitcharuPanyananthaphikkhu Cholprathan Medical Center, Srinakharinwirot University, Nonthaburi, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1880-5387
Kasama ManothummethaDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2446-143X
Achitpol ThongkamDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7279-1062
Nipat ChuleeraruxDepartment of Medicine, University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, Florida, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9474-637X
Anawin SanguankeoDepartment of Preventive and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3662-4136
Lucy X LiDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5857-6227
Surachai LeksuwankunDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0854-3056
Nattapong LangsiriPanyananthaphikkhu Cholprathan Medical Center, Srinakharinwirot University, Nonthaburi, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1889-7122
Pattama TorvorapanitDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9507-6339
Navaporn WorasilchaiDepartment of Transfusion Medicine and Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Allied Health Sciences, and Research Unit of Medical Mycology Diagnosis, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5055-6830
Rongpong PlonglaDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1622-1209
Chatphatai MoonlaDepartment of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University and King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6257-0867
Saman NematollahiDepartment of Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Tucson, Arizona, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6910-1120
Olivia S KatesDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4381-0049
Nitipong PermpalungDepartment of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0749-7342

Funding

RESEARCH TRAINING IN MICROBIAL DISEASEST32AI007291 · NIAID · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI JOEL N BLANKSON, Sara Elizabeth Cosgrove · 1986 to 2026
$9.1M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007291
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

rationaleThe epidemiology and clinical impact of COVID-19-associated candidemia (CAC) remained uncertain, leaving gaps in understanding its prevalence, risk factors and outcomes.

methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by searching PubMed, Embase and Scopus for reports of CAC prevalence, risk factors and clinical outcomes up to June 18, 2024. The generalised linear mixed model was employed to determine the prevalence and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The risk factors and clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without CAC using the inverse variance method.

resultsFrom 81 studies encompassing 29 countries and involving 351,268 patients, the global prevalence of CAC was 4.33% (95% Cl, 3.16%-5.90%) in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. In ICUs, the pooled prevalence of CAC in high-income countries was significantly higher than that of lower-middle-income countries (5.99% [95% Cl, 4.24%-8.40%] vs. 2.23% [95% Cl, 1.06%-4.61%], p = 0.02). Resistant Candida species, including C. auris, C. glabrata (Nakaseomyces glabratus) and C. krusei (Pichia kudriavzveii), constituted 2% of ICU cases. The mortality rate for CAC was 68.40% (95% Cl, 61.86%-74.28%) among ICU patients. Several risk factors were associated with CAC, including antibiotic use, central venous catheter placement, dialysis, mechanical ventilation, tocilizumab, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and total parenteral nutrition. Notably, the pooled odds ratio of tocilizumab was 2.59 (95% CI, 1.44-4.65).

conclusionsThe prevalence of CAC is substantial in the ICU setting, particularly in high-income countries. Several risk factors associated with CAC were identified, including several that are modifiable, offering the opportunity to mitigate the risk of CAC.

Indexed as

CandidemiaCOVID-19Critical IllnessIntensive Care UnitsAntifungal AgentsCandidaHospitalizationHumansPrevalenceRisk FactorsSARS-CoV-2Antifungal AgentscandidemiacandidiasisCOVID‐19prevalenceSARS‐CoV‐2

Identifiers

PMID39379339
PMCPMC11607781

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.