Search

Candidemia, linked to high mortality rates, requires prompt antifungal therapy for better outcomes. Treatment is structured as an action bundle, which is beneficial when followed closely. However, the Japanese action bundle lacks detailed guidance on severe complications like endocarditis or ocular issues. To address this, we adjusted the action bundle and assessed outcomes with and without AFT intervention. We strengthened protocols for blood cultures and organ assessments, and the AFT contacted the primary physician when yeast-like fungi were detected in the patient’s blood culture bottles. Analyzing 204 candidemia cases from 2008–2021, we observed increased adherence and reduced mortality post-AFT intervention. Ophthalmology consultations rose significantly, but many patients had only one visit, suggesting inadequate follow-up. If endophthalmitis is diagnosed, a change in the treatment approach may be necessary. There is a possibility that abnormal ocular findings will be detected during subsequent visits, which highlights the need for improvement in ophthalmology follow-up rates as a future challenge for our AFT activities.

Vancomycin (VCM) and daptomycin (DAP) are standard therapies for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia, despite concerns regarding clinical utility and growing resistance. Linezolid (LZD) affords superior tissue penetration to VCM or DAP and has been successfully used as salvage therapy for persistent MRSA bacteremia, indicating its utility as a first-choice drug against MRSA bacteremia. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we compared the effectiveness and safety of LZD with VCM, teicoplanin (TEIC), or DAP in patients with MRSA bacteremia. We evaluated all-cause mortality as the primary effectiveness outcome, clinical and microbiological cure, hospital length of stay, recurrence, and 90-day readmission rates as secondary effectiveness outcomes, and drug-related adverse effects as primary safety outcomes. We identified 5328 patients across 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 1 pooled analysis of 5 RCTs, 1 subgroup analysis (1 RCT), and 5 case-control and cohort studies (CSs). Primary and secondary effectiveness outcomes were comparable between patients treated with LZD versus VCM, TEIC, or DAP in RCT-based studies and CSs. There was no difference in adverse event incidence between LZD and comparators. These findings suggest that LZD could be a potential first-line drug against MRSA bacteremia as well as VCM or DAP.