Background:Candida auris (now Candidozyma auris) is an emerging pathogen that causes nosocomial candidemia, particularly in intensive care unit (ICU) settings. Its high resistance rates, prolonged environmental persistence, and outbreak potential underscore the need for robust comparative studies with non-auris Candida species (NACS). Methods: In this retrospective, case–control study, adult ICU patients with candidemia were enrolled between April 2022 and October 2024. Clinical data, risk factors, and mortality at 14, 30, and 90 days were compared between the C. auris and NACS groups. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify mortality-associated factors. Results: Of the 182 patients analyzed, candidemia due to C. auris was identified in 33 (18.1%) cases, while 149 (81.9%) cases involved NACS. Fluconazole resistance (p < 0.001), prior antifungal exposure (p = 0.003), urinary catheter use (p = 0.040), and the length of ICU stay before the onset of candidemia (p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the C. auris cases. However, mortality rates at 14, 30, and 90 days were similar between the groups (p = 0.331, 0.108, and 0.273, respectively). The Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score was the only consistent independent predictor of mortality at all time points. In the NACS cases, the Pitt Bacteremia Score and sepsis also predicted 30- and 90-day mortality. While late recurrence was more frequent in the cases of C. auris, early recurrence and other risk factors were similar between the groups. Conclusions:C. auris candidemia was associated with higher fluconazole resistance, prior antifungal use, longer ICU stay, more frequent urinary catheterization, and later recurrence than the NACS cases. However, the mortality rates at 14, 30, and 90 days were comparable. Outcomes were primarily influenced by illness severity rather than the infecting Candida species, highlighting the importance of timely therapy, stewardship, and infection control.

Most of the hospitalized patients are on a number of drugs for comorbidities and/or to prevent nosocomial infections. This necessitates a careful consideration of drug interactions not only to avoid possible toxicities but also to reach the highest efficiency with drug treatment. We aimed to investigate drug interactions related to systemic antibiotic use and compare three different databases to check for drug interactions while characterizing the main differences between medical and surgical departments. This point prevalence study covered data on 927 orders for patients hospitalized between June 3 and 10, 2018 in Ankara University Hospitals. Systemic antibiotic use and related drug interactions were documented using UptoDate, Drugs, and Medscape and comparisons between the departments of medical and surgical sciences were made. The number of orders, or the number of drugs or antibiotics per order were not different between the medical and surgical sciences departments. A total of 1335 antibiotic-related drug interactions of all levels were reported by one, two, or all three databases. UptoDate reported all common and major interactions. Pantoprazole was the most commonly prescribed drug and appeared in 63% of all orders. Among 75 different molecules, ceftriaxone and meropenem were the two most prescribed antibiotics by the surgical and medical departments, respectively. A dramatic variance existed amongst antibiotics prescribed by different departments. This indicated the requirement for a centralized role of an infectious diseases specialist. Especially for the hospitalized patient, prophylactic coverage with at least one antibiotic brought about a number of drug interactions. A precise evaluation of orders in terms of drug interactions by a clinical pharmacist (currently none on duty) will reduce possible drug-related hazards.

Barotrauma is a commonly reported complication in critically ill patients with ARDS caused by different etiologies, it's rate is reported to be around %10. Pneumothorax/pneumomediastinum in COVID-19 patients seem to be more common and have different clinical characteristics. Here we report 9 patients who had pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum during their stay in the ICU. Patients who were admitted to ICU between March 2020 and December 2020, were reviewed for presence of pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and subcutaneous emphysema during their ICU stay. Demographic characteristics, mechanical ventilation settings, documented ventilation parameters, outcomes were studied. A total of 161 patients were admitted to ICU during the study period, 96 were invasively ventilated. Nine patients had developed pneumothorax, pneumomediastinum and/or subcutaneous emphysema during their admission. Five of them were men and median age was 66.6 years. All patients were intubated and mechanically ventilated. All patients were managed conservatively. One patient was discharged from ICU, the others were lost due to other complications related to COVID-19. Upon detection of pneumothorax and/or mediastinum all patients were managed conservatively by limiting their PEEP and maximum inspiratory pressures and were followed by daily chest X-rays (CXR) for detection of any progress. None of the patients showed increase in size of their pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum. Hemodynamically instability due to pneumothorax and/or pneumomediastinum was not observed in any of the patients. Tension pneumothorax was not observed in any of the patients. Most common reason for death was sepsis due to secondary bacterial infections. Acute deterioration with rapid oxygen desaturation or palpation of crepitation over thorax and neck in a COVID-19 patient should prompt a search for pneumothorax or pneumomediastinum. Conservative management may be an option as long as the patients are stable.