Candida isolation from peritoneal fluid: Its role in the outcome of patients with perforation peritonitis

S. Lal, Vinod Kumar Singh, Suhas Agarwal
{"title":"Candida isolation from peritoneal fluid: Its role in the outcome of patients with perforation peritonitis","authors":"S. Lal, Vinod Kumar Singh, Suhas Agarwal","doi":"10.34172/jept.2021.20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: Perforation peritonitis is a common surgical emergency which is treated by surgery and antibiotics. Candida isolation in peritoneal fluid and antifungal treatment is not a norm. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of Candida in peritoneal fluid and its role in the outcome of patients with perforation peritonitis. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted on 70 patients with perforation peritonitis from October 2016 to February 2018. Intraoperatively, peritoneal fluid was taken and sent for microbiological culture and sensitivity. Perforation was managed according to the site of perforation and condition of bowel. Results: The mean age of the patients was 38.74 years with male predominance (58, 82.85%). Forty-seven (67.14%) patients had positive peritoneal cultures. Escherichia coli was the most common bacteria (n=29), while Candida was found to be the most common fungi and was found in 18 patients. The incidence of Candida was higher in upper gastro-duodenal perforation (30, 42.85%). Patients found positive for Candida had APACHE II severity score 10 or more which was higher than the rest of the patients. The mortality was higher in patients with positive peritoneal cultures (10/47) as compare to negative ones (2/23, P<0.001). The mortality in mixed bacterial and fungal-positive cultures (7/18) was also higher as compared to isolated bacterial culture (3/29, P<0.001). The overall mortality rate was 17.14%. Conclusion: Patients with Candida positive peritoneal culture had a significant mortality and morbidity as compared to Candida negative. Peritoneal fluid culture and sensitivity for bacterial and fungal were helpful in the early diagnosis and treatment.","PeriodicalId":36499,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jept.2021.20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Perforation peritonitis is a common surgical emergency which is treated by surgery and antibiotics. Candida isolation in peritoneal fluid and antifungal treatment is not a norm. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of Candida in peritoneal fluid and its role in the outcome of patients with perforation peritonitis. Methods: This prospective observational study was conducted on 70 patients with perforation peritonitis from October 2016 to February 2018. Intraoperatively, peritoneal fluid was taken and sent for microbiological culture and sensitivity. Perforation was managed according to the site of perforation and condition of bowel. Results: The mean age of the patients was 38.74 years with male predominance (58, 82.85%). Forty-seven (67.14%) patients had positive peritoneal cultures. Escherichia coli was the most common bacteria (n=29), while Candida was found to be the most common fungi and was found in 18 patients. The incidence of Candida was higher in upper gastro-duodenal perforation (30, 42.85%). Patients found positive for Candida had APACHE II severity score 10 or more which was higher than the rest of the patients. The mortality was higher in patients with positive peritoneal cultures (10/47) as compare to negative ones (2/23, P<0.001). The mortality in mixed bacterial and fungal-positive cultures (7/18) was also higher as compared to isolated bacterial culture (3/29, P<0.001). The overall mortality rate was 17.14%. Conclusion: Patients with Candida positive peritoneal culture had a significant mortality and morbidity as compared to Candida negative. Peritoneal fluid culture and sensitivity for bacterial and fungal were helpful in the early diagnosis and treatment.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从腹膜液中分离念珠菌:其在穿孔性腹膜炎患者预后中的作用
目的:穿孔性腹膜炎是一种常见的外科急症,常用手术和抗生素治疗。在腹膜液中分离念珠菌和抗真菌治疗是不规范的。本研究的目的是确定念珠菌在腹膜液中的发病率及其在穿孔性腹膜炎患者预后中的作用。方法:对2016年10月至2018年2月70例穿孔性腹膜炎患者进行前瞻性观察研究。术中取腹膜液进行微生物培养和敏感性检测。根据穿孔部位和肠道状况处理穿孔。结果:患者平均年龄38.74岁,男性居多(58岁,82.85%)。47例(67.14%)患者腹膜培养阳性。大肠杆菌是最常见的细菌(n=29),而念珠菌是最常见的真菌,在18例患者中发现。念珠菌在上胃-十二指肠穿孔的发生率较高(30.42.85%)。念珠菌阳性的患者APACHE II严重程度评分为10或更高,高于其他患者。腹膜培养阳性患者的死亡率(10/47)高于阴性患者(2/23,P<0.001)。细菌和真菌混合阳性培养物的死亡率(7/18)也高于分离细菌培养物(3/29,P<0.001)。总死亡率为17.14%。结论:念珠菌腹膜培养阳性患者的死亡率和发病率明显高于念珠菌阴性患者。腹膜液培养及对细菌和真菌的敏感性有助于早期诊断和治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma
Journal of Emergency Practice and Trauma Nursing-Emergency Nursing
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Rhabdomyolysis following electical injury without acute kidney injury Relationship between cardiac ultrasound findings during cardiopulmonary resuscitation with the outcome of patients Using Weibull model of survival analysis workflow and its relevant factors: A prospective cohort study Comparing the effectiveness of oral versus intravenous antibiotics in the prophylaxis of wound infection in hand laceration Post-traumatic growth and perceived social support in young adolescents during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1