Canadian Journal of Infectious Diseases and Medical Microbiology
Volume 2019 (2019), Article ID 2015692, 9 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/2015692

Research Article

Candida Bloodstream Infection: Changing Pattern of Occurrence and Antifungal Susceptibility over 10 Years in a Tertiary Care Saudi Hospital

Nawaf Alkharashi,¹ Sameera Aljohani,² Laila Layqah,³ Emad Masuadi,⁴ Waleed Baharoon,⁵ Hamdan AL-Jahdali,⁶ and Salim Baharoon⁷

¹Department of Emergency Medicine, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
²Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
³Department of Research Office, King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
⁴College of Medicine, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
⁵College of Dentistry, King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
⁶Department of Medicine, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
⁷Department of Intensive Care, King Abdulaziz Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Correspondence should be addressed to Salim Baharoon; baharoon@hotmail.com

Received 20 May 2019; Revised 12 September 2019; Accepted 6 November 2019; Published 18 December 2019

Academic Editor: Gabriele Messina

Copyright © 2019 Nawaf Alkharashi et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

Background. Candida has emerged as one of the most important pathogens that cause bloodstream infection (BSI).Understanding the current Candida BSI trends, the dominant species causing disease and the mortality associated with this infection are crucial to optimize therapeutic and prophylaxis measures. Objectives. To study the epidemiology and to evaluate the risk factors, prognostic factors, and mortality associated with candidemia and to compare these findings with previously published studies from Saudi Arabia. Design. A retrospective medical record review. Setting. Tertiary hospital in Riyadh. Patients and Methods. The analysis included all cases of Candida blood stream infection who are >18 years old over the period from 2013 to 2018. Continuous variables were compared using the parametric T-test while categorical variables were compared using the Chi-squared test. Main Outcome Measure. Incidence, resistance, and hospital outcomes in Candida blood stream infection. Sample Size. 324 patients. Results. Three hundred and twenty-four episodes of Candida blood stream infections were identified. Median age of patients was 49.7 SD ± 28.1 years, and 53% of patients were males. More than half of the patients had an underlying disease involving the abdomen or laparotomy, 78% had an indwelling intravenous catheter, and 62% had suffered a bacterial infection within 2 weeks prior to candidemia. Candida albicans represents 33% of all isolates with decreasing trend overtime. There was an increase in the number of nonalbicans Candida overtime with Candida tropicalis in the lead (20%). Use of broad spectrum antibiotics (82%), prior ICU admission (60%) and use of central venous catheters (58%) were the most prevalent predisposing factors of candidemia. Azole resistance was variable overtime. Resistance to caspofungin remained very low (1.9%). Fourteen days crude mortality was 37% for ICU patients and 26.7% in non-ICU patients, while hospital crude mortality was 64.4% and 46.7%, respectively. Conclusion. There is an increasing trend of nonalbicans Candida blood stream infection. Fluconazole resistance remained low to C. albicans. Most isolates remain susceptible to caspofungin, voriconazole, and amphotericin B. Candida bloodstream infection is associated with high 14-day hospital mortality.

1. Introduction

Over the last two decades, Candida has emerged as one of the most important pathogens causing nosocomial bloodstream infection in both adults and children worldwide [1–6]. Candida is part of our normal flora, and more than 200 species have been described, but only 10% are known to cause human infections [7]. In hospitalized patients and especially in the critically ill patients, Candida is between the fourth and sixth most common isolated pathogen in bloodstream infections [8–12].

As a single species, C. albicans accounts for close to 50% of overall invasive Candida infection. However, there has been a proportionate increase in the isolation of nonalbicans species of Candida [4, 13–18].

Incidence of Candida-invasive blood infection and Candida species isolated varies according to patient population and geographical locations. While some surveillance has described an increase in the incidence of candidemia, others have showed either a stable or decreasing trends [19–24].

In Saudi Arabia, candidemia incidence is not precisely known. Earlier studies revealed a low incidence in general ranging between 0.2 and 0.76 cases/1000 hospital discharges, [25–28] while more recent studies revealed a higher incidence with a median rate of 1.65 per 1,000 hospital discharges per year with a significant trend towards higher rates over time [29, 30]. Candida accounts for 2.8% of all positive blood cultures [31].

The reported mortality secondary to candidemia ranges from 30 to 60% with up to 30 days increase in the length of hospital stay for survivors [11, 12, 16, 32, 33].

Risk factors of bloodstream infections with Candida species have been extensively studied and include malignancies, neutropenia, prolonged ICU (intensive care unit) stays, Candida colonization, severe illness, diabetes, renal failure, hemodialysis, receipt of prolonged courses of broad-spectrum antibiotics, central venous catheterization, parenteral hyperalimentation, immunosuppressive drugs, and transplantation [34–38].

The current project aims to study the epidemiology and to evaluate the risk factors, prognostic factors, and mortality associated with candidemia and to compare these findings with previously published studies from Saudi Arabia.

2. Method

This is a retrospective analysis of all cases of Candida blood stream infection over the period from 2008 to 2015 from a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh Saudi Arabia. National Guard (NGHA) hospital in Riyadh is multiple specialty hospital with a total bed capacity of more than 1200 beds.

Candida blood stream infection is defined as at least 1 blood culture positive for Candida species for a patient who developed signs and symptoms of BSI >48 h after hospital admission. Only the first episode of candidemia was included.

Demographic and clinical data of age, gender, primary illness, comorbidities, and risk factors such as duration of antibiotic therapy, intravenous catheters, endotracheal intubation, and mechanical ventilation at the time when blood culture was positive were all collected.

When data were available, we calculated the Candida score for patients. The score consists of the following: multifocal Candida colonization (1 point), surgery on ICU admission (1 point), severe sepsis (2 points), and TPN (1 point). A cutoff of more than or equal to three was highly predictive of fungal infection. The score is created based on the four predictors of invasive fungal infection in the Estudio de Prevalencia de CANdidiasis project [39]. There was a significant linear association between higher values and invasive fungal infection especially in ICU patients, and a higher score could be used to risk stratify patients for early antifungal treatment [40]. Candida colonization data were frequently missing especially in non-ICU patients.

Candida identification was carried out via VITEK® 2 (bioMérieux, Inc. Hazelwood, MO, USA) healthcare system and bioMérieux API 20C AUX, a system for the identification of the most frequently encountered yeasts. Candida susceptibility was primarily performed with bioMérieux VITEK® 2 Fungal Susceptibility (AST-Y07). Thermo Scientific™ Sensititre™ YeastOne™ YO10 AST antifungal testing (colorimetric microplate-based assay) was occasionally used. Both methods have shown good agreement with the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) broth microdilution reference method (BMD) [39–46].

The permission of the Ethics Committee at King Abdullah International Medical Research Center (KAIMRC) was obtained.

3. Statistical Analysis

Standard descriptive statistics were used. Categorical data were reported as frequencies and percentages, while continuous variables were reported as mean ± standard deviation. Continuous variables were compared using the parametric T-test while categorical variables were compared using the Chi-squared test. Multivariate logistic regression was used to the assess Candida risk factors. Tests were performed two-tailed and considered significant when value  <0.05. All statistical tests were performed using the statistical package IBM SPSS for Windows (version 20.0: SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA).

4. Results

Over the study period, a total of 324 patients with candidemia were identified. Male-to-female ratio was 1.14 with a mean age of 49.7 SD ± 28.1. Candida albicans was the leading cause of candidemia across all years accounting for 33%. Nonalbicans strains as a group were more common representing 67% of all isolates (Table 1).

Table 1: Patients general characteristics.

Item
Identified variables
N (%)

Gender
Male
173 (53.4)

Female
151 (46.6)

Age
Mean ± SD
49.7 ± 28.1

Place of isolation
Intensive care unit (ICU)
219 (67.6)

Medical
49 (15)

Others
56 (17.3)

Nonintensive care unit
105 (32.4)

Risk factors
Prior ICU admission
195 (60.2)

Neutropenia
19 (5.9)

Use of broad-spectrum antibiotic
264 (81.5)

Presence of vascular device
188 (58)

Internal jugular
98 (30.2)

Subclavian
34 (10.5)

Peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC)
33 (10.2)

Femoral
64 (19.8)

Parenteral nutrition
60 (18.5)

Intra-abdominal infection
15 (4.6)

Others (medications)
44 (13.6)

Candida species
C. albicans
108 (33.3)

Nonalbicans
216 (66.7)

C. tropicalis
72 (22.2)

C. glabrata
60 (18.5)

C. parapsilosis
52 (16)

C. krusei
17 (5.2)

Others
15 (4.6)

Drug susceptibility profile (susceptible)
Amphotericin B
315 (97.2)

Caspofungin
314 (96.9)

Fluconazole
214 (66)

Voriconazole
281 (86.7)

14 days outcome
Alive
215 (66.4)

Dead
109 (33.6)

Hospital outcome
Alive
134 (41.4)

Dead
190 (58.6)

= surgical 5.6%, cardiac 6.5%, and hematology 5.2%.

More than two thirds of candidemia episodes (67.6%) occurred in the intensive care units (ICUs) followed by medical wards (15%). There were more candidemia episodes from cardiac wards (6.5%) including CCU and medical cardiac ICU compared with surgical (5.6%) and hematology (5.2%) wards.

In the first two years of the study, there was an increase in candidemia of both nonalbicans and C. albicans groups. While the rate of candidemia due to C. albicans was stable between 2010 and 2013 and decreasing thereafter, nonalbicans candidemia continues to increase (Figure 1(a)). Candida tropicalis followed by Candida glabrata and Candida parapsilosis were the most commonly isolated in the nonalbicans group. While number of isolates due to C. tropicalis was decreasing, both C. glabrata and C. krusei were on the rise (Figure 1(b)). Nonalbicans group were more frequently isolated in ICU patients (63.5% vs. 37.3%, 0.078) crude mortality within the first two weeks after candidemia was 64% and is more observed among patients in ICU when the diagnosis is made (37% vs. 27% 0.016) (Table 2). Overall hospital mortality was 59%. Crude mortality remained high for both nonalbicans and C. albicans groups with a slightly lower rate for former overtime (Figure 2).

(a)

(b)

Figure 1: Trends of candidemia over time. (a) Albicans vs nonalbicans. (b) Candida spp.

Table 2: Patients outcome.

Identified variables
Variable
14 days postisolation outcome

Hospital outcome

Dead N (%)
Alive N (%)
value
Dead N (%)
Alive N (%)
value

Age
≤18
15 (23.4)
49 (76.6)
0.054
26 (40.6)
38 (59.4)
0.001

>18
94 (36.2)
166 (63.8)

164 (63.1)
96 (36.9)

Mean age ± SD

54.9 ± 26
47 ± 28.82
0.013
55.7 ± 26.2
41.2 ± 28.7
<0.001

Gender
Male
60 (34.7)
113 (65.5)
0.671
102 (59)
71 (41)
0.901

Female
49 (32.5)
102 (67.5)
88 (58.3)
63 (41.7)

Primary diagnosis
Abdominal pathology
13 (28.3)
33 (71.7)
0.404
29 (63)
17 (37)
0.513

96 (34.5)
182 (65.5)
161 (57.9)
117 (42.1)

Malignancy
23 (37.1)
39 (62.9)
0.522
39 (62.9)
23 (37.1)
0.449

86 (32.8)
176 (67.2)
151 (57.9)
111 (42.4)

Trauma/surgery
4 (13.8)
25 (86.2)
0.018
11 (37.9)
18 (62.1)
0.018

105 (35.6)
190 (64.4)
179 (60.7)
116 (39.3)

Sepsis/infection
40 (40.8)
58 (59.2)
0.072
60 (61.2)
38 (38.8)
0.534

69 (30.5)
157 (69.5)
130 (57.5)
96 (42.5)

Kidney disease
12 (32.4)
25 (67.6)
0.869
22 (59.5)
15 (40.5)
0.915

97(33.8)
190 (66.2)
168 (58.5)
119 (41.5)

Burn
4 (30.8)
9 (69.2)
0.823
7 (53.8)
6 (46.2)
0.720

105 (33.8)
206 (66.2)
183 (58.8)
128 (41.2)

Others
36 (32.1)
76 (67.9)
0.678
67 (59.8)
45 (40.2)
0.754

73 (34.4)
139 (65.6)
123 (58)
89 (42)

Comorbidities
Diabetes mellitus
59 (35.8)
106 (64.2)
0.412
113 (68.5)
52 (31.5)
<0.001

50 (31.4)
109 (68.6)
77 (48.4)
82 (51.6)

Renal disease
48 (44.9)
59 (55.1)
0.003
79 (73.8)
28 (26.2)
<0.001

61 (28.1)
156 (71.9)
111 (51.2)
106 (48.8)

Cardiac disease
24 (32)
51 (68.1)
0.731
55 (73.3)
20 (26.7)
0.003

85 (34.1)
164 (65.9)
135 (54.2)
114 (45.8)

Respiratory disease
16 (37.2)
27 (62.8)
0.595
27 (62.8)
16 (37.2)
0.553

93 (33.1)
188 (66.9)
163 (58)
118 (42)

Liver disease
16 (53.3)
14 (46.7)
0.017
24 (80)
6 (20)
0.013

93 (31.6)
201 (68.4)
166 (56.5)
128 (43.5)

Malignancy
20 (35.1)
37 (64.9)
0.799
32 (56.1)
25 (43.9)
0.673

89 (33.3)
178 (66.7)
158 (59.2)
109 (40.8)

Recent steroid use
62 (39.2)
96 (60.8)
0.037
106 (67.1)
52 (32.9)
0.003

47 (28.3)
119 (71.7)
84 (50.6)
82 (49.4)

Others
5 (33.3)
10 (66.7)
0.979
179 (57.9)
4 (26.7)
0.237

104 (33.7)
205 (66.3
11 (73.3)
130 (42.1)

Site at isolation
ICU
81 (37)
138 (63)
0.066
141 (64.4)
78 (35.6)
0.002

Non-ICU
28 (26.7)
77 (73.3)
49 (46.7)
56 (53.3)

Device related
Yes
76 (40.4)
112 (59.6)
0.002
124 (66)
64 (43)
0.002

No
33 (24.3)
103 (75.7)
66 (48.5)
70 (51.5)

Prior ICU admission
Yes
68 (34.9)
127 (65.1)
0.565
121 (62.1)
74 (37.9)
0.126

No
41 (31.8)
88 (68.2)
69 (53.5)
60 (46.5)

Use of broad-spectrum antibiotics
Yes
95 (36)
169 (64)
0.061
168 (88.4)
96 (71.6)
<0.001

No
14 (23.3)
46 (76.7)

Candida species
C. albicans
40 (37)
68 (63)
0.322
46 (42.6)
62 (57.4)
0.666

Nonalbicans

(i) C. tropicalis
69 (31.9)
147 (68)
88 (40.7)
128 (59.3)

(ii) C. glabrata
21 (29.2)
51 (70.8)
42 (58.3)
30 (41.7)

(iii) C. parapsilosis
19 (31.7)
41 (68.3)
40 (66.7)
20 (33.3)

(iv) C. krusei
15 (28.8)
37 (71.2)
28 (53.8)
24 (46.2)

9 (52.9)
8 (47.1)
11 (64.7)
6 (35.3)

Risk factors
Yes
105 (33.5)
208 (66.5)
0.846
186 (58.4)
127 (40.6)
0.127

No
4 (36.4)
7 (63.6)
4 (36.4)
7 (63.6)

Prior colonization
Yes
35 (35)
65 (65)
0.730
62 (62)
38 (38)
0.412

No
74 (33)
150 (67)
128 (57.1)
96 (42.9)

Treatment duration
≤48 h
18 (69.2)
8 (30.8)
0.001
21 (80.8)
5 (19.2)
0.017

>48 h
83 (29.5)
198 (70.5)
159 (56.6)
122 (43.4)

Azole therapy
Yes
15 (20)
60 (80)
0.004
33 (44)
42 (56)
0.003

No
94 (37.8)
155 (62.2)
157 (63.1)
92 (36.9)

Figure 2: Hospital case fatality.

Patients where candidemia was diagnosed in ICU were significantly less likely to leave hospital alive ( 0.002) (Table 2) Older age, candidemia in the patients with chronic liver disease, and treatment with azole therapy were all associated with worst outcome, while invasive Candida infection in trauma/surgery patients and those that are device-related have a better outcome (Table 2).

In multivariate analysis, risk factors for candidemia includes use of broad-spectrum antibiotics (81.5%) followed by ICU admission (60.2%) and use of central venous catheters (58%) (Table 3). Candida score was less or equal to 2 in 79% of patient with candidemia.

Table 3: A multivariate regression analysis of Candida risk factors.

Variable
Infection outcome
Hospital outcome

95% CI for OR
95% CI for OR

Lower
Upper
value
OR
Lower
Upper
value
OR

Prior ICU admission (yes/no)
0.531
1.478
0.642
0.886
0.71
1.89
0.559
1.16

Neutropenia (yes/no)
0.218
1.936
0.439
0.65
0.29
2.01
0.585
0.76

Use of broad-spectrum antibiotic (yes/no)
0.948
3.609
0.071
1.849
1.74
5.77
<0.001
3.17

CV (yes/no)
1.269
3.631
0.004
2.146
1.22
3.26
0.006
1.99

TPN (yes/no)
0.286
1.085
0.085
0.557
0.56
1.86
0.944
1.02

Chemotherapy (yes/no)
0.267
2.683
0.778
0.847
0.33
2.61
0.887
0.93

Intra-abdominal infection (yes/no)
0.426
3.865
0.658
1.283
0.37
3.43
0.834
1.13

Chronic use of steroid (yes/no)
0.36
4.03
0.762
1.205
0.16
1.68
0.267
0.51

Immune-modulating drugs (yes/no)
0.285
5.194
0.792
1.216
0.16
2.55
0.527
0.64

The Candida albicans group remained very susceptible to amphotericin B and echinocandin (caspofungin was the only echinocandin available in our hospital during the study period) (Table 4). Susceptibility to fluconazole remained high (77%). Among nonalbicans group susceptibility to fluconazole and voriconazole were 60% and 89%, respectively (Table 4). Although susceptibility to azoles (fluconazole and voriconazole) among the C. albicans group was trending lower during the study period, there was a significant increase in susceptibility over time in recent years in both C. albicans and nonalbicans groups (Figures 3(a) and 3(b)).

Table 4: Candida species susceptibility profile.

Candida spp
Amphotericin B N (%)
Caspofungin N (%)
Fluconazole N (%)
Voriconazole N (%)

C. albicans
106 (98.1)
106 (98.1)
83 (76.9)
89 (82.4)

C. tropicalis
72 (100)
69 (95.8)
52 (72.2)
63 (87.5)

C. glabrata
60 (100)
58 (96.7)
29 (48.3)
47 (78.3)

C. parapsilosis
52 (100)
52 (100)
32 (61.5)
51 (98)

C. krusei
13 (76.5)
16 (94)
4 (23.5)
16 (94)

Others
12 (80)
13 (86.7)
14 (93.3)
15 (100)

(a)

(b)

Figure 3: Susceptibility trend over time.

5. Discussion

Candida infection is a leading cause of invasive fungal infection worldwide [1, 2, 4, 13, 30]. Epidemiological studies have suggested that the annual incidence of candidemia in some countries might have stabilized or even decreased; however, there is a significant geographical variation [2, 4, 14, 18, 22–25, 29, 30].

Local epidemiological surveillance studies are important to guide empirical and therapeutic antifungal therapy. There is no Saudi national data on incidence and prevalence of invasive fungal infection. However, some centers have reported low and decreasing trends, while others showed an increasing rate [22–25, 30]. Candida albicans-invasive infection remains the most frequently isolated single species in our study albeit trending down frequency. Similar to other studies, BSI due to nonalbicans Candida as a group is higher with increasing frequency [29, 47, 48]. Candida tropicalis is the most frequently isolated among the nonalbicans group. In Saudi Arabia, Candida tropicalis has been the main species isolated among NAC (nonalbicans Candida) in both adult and pediatric population in most of the studies reported followed by Candida glabrata [6, 25–27, 30]. Risk factors for the emergence of nonalbicans Candida include increasing use of an antifungal regimen specially fluconazole, use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, and the increasing number of immunocompromised patients [37, 49, 50]. The decreasing trends of Candida tropicalis over time in our cohort is substituted by increasing frequency of C. glabrata and C. Krusei. This change over time may reflect patient variation and antimicrobial regimens that include more echinocandin use [51].

The European SENTRY investigators’ reported C. parapsilosis as the most frequently encountered Candida spp, while C. glabrata as the most commonly isolated NAC in US [2]. Other Candida species were more predominant in other countries. Such variability likely represents differences in populations studied and risk factors encountered [4, 32, 52].

Risk factors for invasive Candida across many studies from Saudi are consistent and similar to what is reported internationally. Use of broad-spectrum antibiotics, admission to ICU, and central vascular access were the main reported [6, 29, 30, 53].

Extensive use of broad-spectrum antimicrobial remains a very big challenge in Saudi Arabia. Ministry of health has recently launched a major campaign to combat the crisis of inappropriate use of antimicrobial in the Kingdom. More than two-third of our patients were ICU patients or with previous visit to ICU which is a major place for antimicrobial use. Vascular devices were in place in 58% of patients with candidemia. Those two factors are amenable to improvement through effective stewardship programs.

Most of the Candida spp. remains sensitive to polyene and echinocandins worldwide [11, 30, 54]. Candida albicans remains mostly sensitive to azoles. Resistance to fluconazole ranges between 0.3 and 2 percent [2, 53, 54]. However, Candida albicans with reduced susceptibility to fluconazole have been observed in many centers including Saudi Arabia [31, 55]. In our series, only 68% of Candida albicans isolates were reported sensitive to fluconazole at the start of the study, but much higher susceptibility was observed at the end of the study (95%). Similar to other studies, resistance to fluconazole was overall predictive of resistance to voriconazole in our series [54, 56]. Candida Krusei susceptibility to amphotericin B was lower than what is reported internationally but consistent with what was previously reported from Saudi Arabia (76%) [11, 29, 56].

Invasive Candida infection is associated with significant mortality especially in ICU and among older patients [1, 4, 11, 16, 30, 32, 33, 57, 58]. Both hospital and 14-day mortality in our cohort was high and was significantly higher among patients with ICU candidemia (37% vs. 26% 0.066) and in those with candidemia related to vascular device. Patients with chronic liver disease and chronic and or acute renal failure requiring renal supportive therapy have significantly worse outcomes ( 0.017 and 0.003) Treatment for less than 48 hours and with azole therapy were also associated with worse outcome.

This study still represents single center experience which may vary according to hospital profile of admission and regional patient’s characteristics. There is a need for more comprehensive national data that should not be limited to one health care provider or geographical areas.

In conclusion, the nonalbicans Candida group was the major cause of invasive candidemia and was trending higher overtime while Candida albicans were decreasing. Candida glabrata is emerging as the most frequent overtime. Most of the Candida spp. remained highly susceptible to all lines of therapy. Mortality remained high for all cases with invasive candidemia and especially among critically ill patients.

Data Availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon request.

Additional Points

This study still represents single-center experience which may vary according to the hospital profile of admission and regional patient’s characteristics.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

References

H. Wisplinghoff, T. Bischoff, S. M. Tallent, H. Seifert, R. P. Wenzel, and M. B. Edmond, “Nosocomial bloodstream infections in US hospitals: analysis of 24,179 cases from a prospective nationwide surveillance study,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 309–317, 2004.

M. A. Pfaller, D. J. Diekema, R. N. Jones et al., “International surveillance of bloodstream infections due to Candida species: frequency of occurrence and in vitro susceptibilities to fluconazole, ravuconazole, and voriconazole of isolates collected from 1997 through 1999 in the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 3254–3259, 2001.

O. Marchetti, J. Bille, U. Fluckiger et al., “Epidemiology of candidemia in Swiss tertiary care hospitals: secular trends, 1991–2000,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 311–320, 2004.

A. M. Tortorano, J. Peman, H. Bernhardt et al., “Epidemiology of candidaemia in Europe: results of 28-month European Confederation of Medical Mycology (ECMM) hospital-based surveillance study,” European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 317–322, 2004.

T. E. Zaoutis, J. Argon, J. Chu, J. A. Berlin, T. J. Walsh, and C. Feudtner, “The epidemiology and attributable outcomes of candidemia in adults and children hospitalized in the United States: a propensity analysis,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 41, no. 9, pp. 1232–1239, 2005.

Z. Almooosa, G. Y. Ahmed, A. Omran et al., “Invasive candidiasis in pediatric patients at King Fahad Medical City in Central Saudi Arabia. A 5-year retrospective study,” Saudi Medical Journal, vol. 38, no. 11, pp. 1118–1124, 2017.

R. Cohen, F. J. Roth, E. Delgado, D. G. Ahearn, and M. H. Kalser, “Fungal flora of the normal human small and large intestine,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 280, no. 12, pp. 638–641, 1969.

E. Bouza and P. Muñoz, “Epidemiology of candidemia in intensive care units,” International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. S87–S91, 2008.

P. Eggimann, J. Garbino, and D. Pittet, “Epidemiology of Candida species infections in critically ill non-immunosuppressed patients,” The Lancet Infectious Diseases, vol. 3, no. 11, pp. 685–702, 2003.

L. Ostrosky-Zeichner and P. G. Pappas, “Invasive candidiasis in the intensive care unit,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 34, no. 3, pp. 857–863, 2006.

H. M. Al-Dorzi, H. Sakkijha, R. Khan et al., “Invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients: a prospective cohort study in two tertiary care centers,” Journal of Intensive Care Medicine, Article ID 885066618767835, 2018.

S. I. Blot, K. H. Vandewoude, E. A. Hoste, and F. A. Colardyn, “Effects of nosocomial candidemia on outcomes of critically ill patients,” The American Journal of Medicine, vol. 113, no. 6, pp. 480–485, 2002.

M. Bassetti, E. Righi, A. Costa et al., “Epidemiological trends in nosocomial candidemia in intensive care,” BMC Infectious Diseases, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 21, 2006.

J. Pemán, E. Cantón, and M. Gobernado, “Epidemiology and antifungal susceptibility of Candida species isolated from blood: results of a 2-year multicentre study in Spain,” European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 23–30, 2005.

A. Malani, J. Hmoud, L. Chiu, P. L. Carver, A. Bielaczyc, and C. A. Kauffman, “Candida glabrata fungemia: experience in a tertiary care center,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 975–981, 2005.

B. Almirante, D. Rodríguez, M. Cuenca-Estrella et al., “Epidemiology, risk factors, and prognosis of Candida parapsilosis bloodstream infections: case-control population-based surveillance study of patients in Barcelona, Spain, from 2002 to 2003,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 1681–1685, 2006.

D. Trofa, A. Gácser, and J. D. Nosanchuk, “Candida parapsilosis, an emerging fungal pathogen,” Clinical Microbiology Reviews, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 606–625, 2008.

T. Nakamura and H. Takahashi, “Epidemiological study of Candida infections in blood: susceptibilities of Candida spp. to antifungal agents, and clinical features associated with the candidemia,” Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 132–138, 2006.

D. L. Horn, D. Neofytos, E. J. Anaissie et al., “Epidemiology and outcomes of candidemia in 2019 patients: data from the prospective antifungal therapy alliance registry,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 48, no. 12, pp. 1695–1703, 2009.

M. Nucci, F. Queiroz-Telles, T. Alvarado-Matute et al., “Epidemiology of candidemia in Latin America: a laboratory-based survey,” PLoS One, vol. 8, no. 3, Article ID e59373, 2013.

H. Wang, Y. C. Xu, and P. R. Hsueh, “Epidemiology of candidemia and antifungal susceptibility in invasive Candida species in the Asia-Pacific region,” Future Microbiology, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 1461–1477, 2016.

J. Morgan, “Global trends in candidemia: review of reports from 1995–2005,” Current Infectious Disease Reports, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 429–439, 2005.

M. S. Rangel-Frausto, T. Wiblin, H. M. Blumberg et al., “National epidemiology of mycoses survey (NEMIS): variations in rates of bloodstream infections due to Candida species in seven surgical intensive care units and six neonatal intensive care units,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 253–258, 1999.

S. Y. Ruan and P. R. Hsueh, “Invasive candidiasis: an overview from Taiwan,” Journal of the Formosan Medical Association, vol. 108, no. 6, pp. 443–451, 2009.

J. A. Al-Tawfiq, “Distribution and epidemiology of Candida species causing fungemia at a Saudi Arabian hospital, 1996–2004,” International Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 239–244, 2007.

H. A. Bukharie, “Nosocomial candidemia in a tertiary care hospital in Saudi Arabia,” Mycopathologia, vol. 153, no. 4, pp. 195–198, 2002.

D. H. Akbar and A. T. Tahawi, “Candidemia at a University Hospital: epidemiology, risk factors and predictors of mortality,” Annals of Saudi Medicine, vol. 21, no. 3-4, pp. 178–182, 2001.

S. S. Al-Hedaithy, “The yeast species causing fungemia at a university hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, during a 10-year period,” Mycoses, vol. 46, no. 8, pp. 293–298, 2003.

A. H. O. Al Thaqafi, F. M. Farahat, M. I. Al Harbi, A. F. W. Al Amri, and J. R. Perfect, “Predictors and outcomes of Candida bloodstream infection: eight-year surveillance, western Saudi Arabia,” International Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 21, pp. 5–9, 2014.

A. S. Omrani, E. A. Makkawy, K. Baig et al., “Ten-year review of invasive Candida infections in a tertiary care center in Saudi Arabia,” Saudi Medical Journal, vol. 35, no. 8, pp. 821–826, 2014.

A. O. Osoba, A. W. Al-Mowallad, D. E. McAlear, and B. A. Hussein, “Candidemia and the susceptibility pattern of Candida isolates in blood,” Saudi Medical Journal, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 1060–1063, 2003.

H. L. Nace, D. Horn, and D. Neofytos, “Epidemiology and outcome of multiple-species candidemia at a tertiary care center between 2004 and 2007,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 289–294, 2009.

C. C. Kibbler, S. Seaton, R. A. Barnes et al., “Management and outcome of bloodstream infections due to Candida species in England and Wales,” Journal of Hospital Infection, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 18–24, 2003.

M. Nucci and A. Colombo, “Risk factors for breakthrough candidemia,” European Journal of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 209–211, 2002.

F. C. Odds, M. F. Hanson, A. D. Davidson et al., “One year prospective survey of Candida bloodstream infections in Scotland,” Journal of Medical Microbiology, vol. 56, no. 8, pp. 1066–1075, 2007.

O. Uzun, S. Ascioglu, E. J. Anaissie, and J. H. Rex, “Risk factors and predictors of outcome in patients with cancer and breakthrough candidemia,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 1713–1717, 2001.

J. K. Chow, Y. Golan, R. Ruthazer et al., “Risk factors for albicans and non-albicans candidemia in the intensive care unit,” Critical Care Medicine, vol. 36, no. 7, pp. 1993–1998, 2008.

Y. R. Cheng, L. C. Lin, T. G. Young, C. E. Liu, C. H. Chen, and R. W. Tsay, “Risk factors for candidemia-related mortality at a medical center in central Taiwan,” Journal of Microbiology, Immunology, and Infection, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 155–161, 2006.

M. Melhem, A. Bertoletti, H. Lucca, R. Silva, F. Meneghin, and M. Szeszs, “Use of the VITEK 2 system to identify and test the antifungal susceptibility of clinically relevant yeast species,” Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 1257–1266, 2013.

M. A. Pfaller, D. J. Diekema, G. W. Procop, and M. G. Rinaldi, “Multicenter comparison of the VITEK 2 yeast susceptibility test with the CLSI broth microdilution reference method for testing fluconazole against Candida spp,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 796–802, 2007.

O. Meurman, A. Koskensalo, and K. Rantakokko-Jalava, “Evaluation of Vitek 2 for identification of yeasts in the clinical laboratory,” Clinical Microbiology and Infection, vol. 12, no. 6, pp. 591–593, 2006.

J. H. Rex, B. D. Alexander, D. Andes et al., Reference Method for Broth Dilution Antifungal Susceptibility Testing of Yeasts, Approved Standard—Third Edition, CLSI Document M27-A3, Clinical and Laboratory Standard Institute, Wayne, PA, USA, 2008.

K. G. Davey, A. Szekely, E. M. Johnson, and D. W. Warnock, “Comparison of a new commercial colorimetric microdilution method with a standard method for in-vitro susceptibility testing of Candida spp. and Cryptococcus neoformans,” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 439–444, 1998.

A. Espinel-Ingroff, M. Pfaller, S. A. Messer et al., “Multicenter comparison of the sensititre YeastOne Colorimetric Antifungal Panel with the National Committee for Clinical Laboratory standards M27-A reference method for testing clinical isolates of common and emerging Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp., and other yeasts and yeast-like organisms,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 591–595, 1999.

M. A. Pfaller, A. Espinel-Ingroff, and R. N. Jones, “Clinical evaluation of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal plate for antifungal susceptibility testing of the new triazoles voriconazole, posaconazole, and ravuconazole,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 4577–4580, 2004.

A. Espinel-Ingroff, M. Pfaller, S. A. Messer, C. C. Knapp, N. Holliday, and S. B. Killian, “Multicenter comparison of the Sensititre YeastOne colorimetric antifungal panel with the NCCLS M27-A2 reference method for testing new antifungal agents against clinical isolates of Candida spp,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 718–721, 2004.

S. C. Deorukhkar, S. Saini, and S. Mathew, “Non-albicans candida infection: an emerging threat,” Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Infectious Diseases, vol. 2014, Article ID 615958, 7 pages, 2014.

A. L. Colombo, T. Guimarães, T. Sukienik et al., “Prognostic factors and historical trends in the epidemiology of candidemia in critically ill patients: an analysis of five multicenter studies sequentially conducted over a 9-year period,” Intensive Care Medicine, vol. 40, no. 10, pp. 1489–1498, 2014.

R. J. Kothavade, M. M. Kura, A. G. Valand, and M. H. Panthaki, “Candida tropicalis: its prevalence, pathogenicity and increasing resistance to fluconazole,” Journal of Medical Microbiology, vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 873–880, 2010.

B. J. Kullberg and M. C. Arendrup, “Invasive candidiasis,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 373, no. 15, pp. 1445–1456, 2015.

M. A. Pfaller, M. Castanheira, S. R. Lockhart, A. M. Ahlquist, S. A. Messer, and R. N. Jones, “Frequency of decreased susceptibility and resistance to echinocandins among fluconazole-resistant bloodstream isolates of Candida glabrata,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1199–1203, 2012.

V. Krčméry Jr. and G. Kovačičová, “Longitudinal 10-year prospective survey of fungaemia in Slovak Republic: trends in etiology in 310 episodes. Slovak Fungaemia study group,” Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 7–11, 2000.

M. A. Pfaller, G. J. Moet, S. A. Messer, R. N. Jones, and M. Castanheira, “CandidaBloodstream infections: comparison of species distributions and antifungal resistance patterns in community-onset and nosocomial isolates in the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program, 2008-2009,” Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 561–566, 2011.

G. M. Lyon, S. Karatela, S. Sunay, and Y. Adiri, “Antifungal susceptibility testing of Candida isolates from the Candida surveillance study,” Journal of Clinical Microbiology, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 1270–1275, 2010.

F. Eksi, E. D. Gayyurhan, and I. Balci, “In vitro susceptibility of Candida species to four antifungal agents assessed by the reference broth microdilution method,” The Scientific World Journal, vol. 2013, Article ID 236903, 6 pages, 2013.

D. A. Oxman, J. K. Chow, G. Frendl et al., “Candidaemia associated with decreased in vitro fluconazole susceptibility: is Candida speciation predictive of the susceptibility pattern?” Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 1460–1465, 2010.

O. Gudlaugsson, S. Gillespie, K. Lee et al., “Attributable mortality of nosocomial candidemia, revisited,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 1172–1177, 2003.

D. R. Andes, N. Safdar, J. W. Baddley et al., “Impact of treatment strategy on outcomes in patients with candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis: a patient-level quantitative review of randomized trials,” Clinical Infectious Diseases, vol. 54, no. 8, pp. 1110–1122, 2012.