Detection of Scedosporium spp.: Colonizer or pathogen? A retrospective analysis of clinical significance and management in a large tertiary center
Medical Mycology, ISSN: 1460-2709, Vol: 62, Issue: 2
2024
- 2Citations
- 3Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations2
- Citation Indexes2
- Captures3
- Readers3
Article Description
Infections with Scedosporium spp. are emerging in the past two decades and are associated with a high mortality rate. Microbiological detection can be associated with either colonization or infection. Evolution from colonization into infection is difficult to predict and clinical management upon microbiological detection is complex. Microbiological samples from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively analyzed in a single tertiary care center. Classification into colonization or infection was performed upon first microbiological detection. Clinical evolution was observed until July 2023. Further diagnostic procedures after initial detection were analyzed. Among 38 patients with microbiological detection of Scedosporium spp., 10 were diagnosed with an infection at the initial detection and two progressed from colonization to infection during the observation time. The main sites of infection were lung (5/12; 41.6%) followed by ocular sites (4/12; 33.3%). Imaging, bronchoscopy or biopsies upon detection were performed in a minority of patients. Overall mortality rate was similar in both groups initially classified as colonization or infection [30.7% and 33.3%, respectively (P = 1.0)]. In all patients where surgical debridement of site of infection was performed (5/12; 42%); no death was observed. Although death occurred more often in the group without eradication (3/4; 75%) compared with the group with successful eradication (1/8; 12.5%), statistical significance could not be reached (P = 0.053). As therapeutic management directly impacts patients' outcome, a multidisciplinary approach upon microbiological detection of Scedosporium spp. should be encouraged. Data from larger cohorts are warranted in order to analyze contributing factors favoring the evolution from colonization into infection.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85184150661&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myae002; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38242842; https://academic.oup.com/mmy/article/doi/10.1093/mmy/myae002/7577621; https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mmy/myae002; https://academic.oup.com/mmy/article/62/2/myae002/7577621
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know