Paras P Shah, Daniel Barmas-Alamdari, Hannah Yoo, Jake Diamond, Daniel Zhu, Alina Djougarian
{"title":"回顾住院患者眼珠菌病筛查的有效性:一项8年回顾性研究。","authors":"Paras P Shah, Daniel Barmas-Alamdari, Hannah Yoo, Jake Diamond, Daniel Zhu, Alina Djougarian","doi":"10.1080/09273948.2025.2462772","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We sought to re-evaluate the utility of inpatient ocular Candidiasis screening, subsequent interventions, and outcomes, to ultimately guide alignment between American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2017-2024 at two tertiary care centers in the New York metropolitan area. Inclusion criteria included positive Candidal cultures, a pertinent International Classification of Diseases, 10<sup>th</sup> revision (ICD-10) code, or both. Culture results, mental status, visual acuity, ocular symptoms, systemic antifungal use, dilated fundus exam (DFE) findings, immunocompromised status, and interventions performed were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 897 patient encounters meeting inclusion criteria, 285 (31.8%) underwent consultation to rule-out ocular Candidiasis. Among these patients, 212 (74.4%) had an unremarkable DFE, 35 (12.3%) had DFE findings attributable to other comorbidities, 24 (8.4%) had nonspecific DFE findings requiring follow-up, nine (3.2%) were diagnosed with Candida retinitis, and one (0.4%) had Candida endophthalmitis. There were no statistically significant differences in the odds of DFE positivity between the immunocompromised versus immunocompetent group (χ2 = 0.881, <i>p</i> = 0.348) or the symptomatic versus asymptomatic group (χ2 = 0.297, <i>p</i> = 0.586). During the entire study period, no ophthalmology-directed interventions were made.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Candida endophthalmitis and Candida retinitis are rare in the inpatient setting, even in patients with confirmed Candidemia. Patients are universally started on empiric intravenous antifungal treatment by primary or infectious disease teams prior to ophthalmology consultation, limiting the yield of these examinations. Further studies should be undertaken to create a protocol for these patients such that serious sequelae of disease are prevented while resources are also utilized appropriately.</p>","PeriodicalId":19406,"journal":{"name":"Ocular Immunology and Inflammation","volume":" ","pages":"892-896"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Revisiting the Utility of Inpatient Screening for Ocular Candidiasis: An Eight-Year Retrospective Study.\",\"authors\":\"Paras P Shah, Daniel Barmas-Alamdari, Hannah Yoo, Jake Diamond, Daniel Zhu, Alina Djougarian\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09273948.2025.2462772\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We sought to re-evaluate the utility of inpatient ocular Candidiasis screening, subsequent interventions, and outcomes, to ultimately guide alignment between American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2017-2024 at two tertiary care centers in the New York metropolitan area. Inclusion criteria included positive Candidal cultures, a pertinent International Classification of Diseases, 10<sup>th</sup> revision (ICD-10) code, or both. Culture results, mental status, visual acuity, ocular symptoms, systemic antifungal use, dilated fundus exam (DFE) findings, immunocompromised status, and interventions performed were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 897 patient encounters meeting inclusion criteria, 285 (31.8%) underwent consultation to rule-out ocular Candidiasis. Among these patients, 212 (74.4%) had an unremarkable DFE, 35 (12.3%) had DFE findings attributable to other comorbidities, 24 (8.4%) had nonspecific DFE findings requiring follow-up, nine (3.2%) were diagnosed with Candida retinitis, and one (0.4%) had Candida endophthalmitis. There were no statistically significant differences in the odds of DFE positivity between the immunocompromised versus immunocompetent group (χ2 = 0.881, <i>p</i> = 0.348) or the symptomatic versus asymptomatic group (χ2 = 0.297, <i>p</i> = 0.586). During the entire study period, no ophthalmology-directed interventions were made.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Candida endophthalmitis and Candida retinitis are rare in the inpatient setting, even in patients with confirmed Candidemia. Patients are universally started on empiric intravenous antifungal treatment by primary or infectious disease teams prior to ophthalmology consultation, limiting the yield of these examinations. Further studies should be undertaken to create a protocol for these patients such that serious sequelae of disease are prevented while resources are also utilized appropriately.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ocular Immunology and Inflammation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"892-896\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ocular Immunology and Inflammation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09273948.2025.2462772\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OPHTHALMOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ocular Immunology and Inflammation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09273948.2025.2462772","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:我们试图重新评估住院患者眼部念珠菌病筛查的效用、随后的干预措施和结果,以最终指导美国眼科学会(AAO)和美国传染病学会(IDSA)指南的一致性。方法:回顾性队列研究于2017-2024年在纽约大都会地区的两家三级医疗中心进行。纳入标准包括念珠菌培养阳性,相关的国际疾病分类第10版(ICD-10)代码,或两者兼而有之。记录培养结果、精神状态、视力、眼部症状、全身性抗真菌药物使用、眼底扩张检查(DFE)结果、免疫功能低下状态和实施的干预措施。结果:在897例符合纳入标准的患者中,285例(31.8%)接受了排除眼部念珠菌病的会诊。在这些患者中,212例(74.4%)的DFE表现不明显,35例(12.3%)的DFE表现可归因于其他合共病,24例(8.4%)的DFE表现非特异性,需要随访,9例(3.2%)被诊断为念珠菌性视网膜炎,1例(0.4%)被诊断为念珠菌性眼内炎。免疫功能低下组与免疫功能正常组DFE阳性的几率差异无统计学意义(χ2 = 0.881, p = 0.348),有症状组与无症状组DFE阳性的几率差异无统计学意义(χ2 = 0.297, p = 0.586)。在整个研究期间,没有进行眼科指导干预。结论:念珠菌眼内炎和念珠菌视网膜炎在住院患者中是罕见的,即使在确诊念珠菌感染的患者中也是如此。患者普遍在眼科会诊前由原发性或感染性疾病小组进行经验性静脉抗真菌治疗,这限制了这些检查的结果。应该进行进一步的研究,为这些病人制定一项协议,以便在适当利用资源的同时预防疾病的严重后遗症。
Revisiting the Utility of Inpatient Screening for Ocular Candidiasis: An Eight-Year Retrospective Study.
Purpose: We sought to re-evaluate the utility of inpatient ocular Candidiasis screening, subsequent interventions, and outcomes, to ultimately guide alignment between American Academy of Ophthalmology (AAO) and Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) guidelines.
Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2017-2024 at two tertiary care centers in the New York metropolitan area. Inclusion criteria included positive Candidal cultures, a pertinent International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) code, or both. Culture results, mental status, visual acuity, ocular symptoms, systemic antifungal use, dilated fundus exam (DFE) findings, immunocompromised status, and interventions performed were recorded.
Results: Of 897 patient encounters meeting inclusion criteria, 285 (31.8%) underwent consultation to rule-out ocular Candidiasis. Among these patients, 212 (74.4%) had an unremarkable DFE, 35 (12.3%) had DFE findings attributable to other comorbidities, 24 (8.4%) had nonspecific DFE findings requiring follow-up, nine (3.2%) were diagnosed with Candida retinitis, and one (0.4%) had Candida endophthalmitis. There were no statistically significant differences in the odds of DFE positivity between the immunocompromised versus immunocompetent group (χ2 = 0.881, p = 0.348) or the symptomatic versus asymptomatic group (χ2 = 0.297, p = 0.586). During the entire study period, no ophthalmology-directed interventions were made.
Conclusion: Candida endophthalmitis and Candida retinitis are rare in the inpatient setting, even in patients with confirmed Candidemia. Patients are universally started on empiric intravenous antifungal treatment by primary or infectious disease teams prior to ophthalmology consultation, limiting the yield of these examinations. Further studies should be undertaken to create a protocol for these patients such that serious sequelae of disease are prevented while resources are also utilized appropriately.
期刊介绍:
Ocular Immunology & Inflammation ranks 18 out of 59 in the Ophthalmology Category.Ocular Immunology and Inflammation is a peer-reviewed, scientific publication that welcomes the submission of original, previously unpublished manuscripts directed to ophthalmologists and vision scientists. Published bimonthly, the journal provides an international medium for basic and clinical research reports on the ocular inflammatory response and its control by the immune system. The journal publishes original research papers, case reports, reviews, letters to the editor, meeting abstracts, and invited editorials.