Search

Background Candidemia is the fourth leading hospital-acquired bloodstream infection with an estimated mortality rate of 35%. Fungal blood cultures result in at least five days and fail to identify 40% of Candida infections. The T2 Candida Panel is a diagnostic test which utilizes whole blood to provide rapid detection of five Candida varieties. It has a 91% sensitivity and 99% specificity rate and enables physicians to initiate or de-escalate therapy rapidly, possibly decreasing mortality. However, practical utilization clinically has not been studied. Our aim is to evaluate the appropriate utilization of the T2 Candida Panel in a large community hospital. Methods A retrospective chart review of hospitalized with a T2 Candida Panel result from December 2015 to June 2018 was performed. The panel was restricted and could only be ordered by two specialties, Infectious Disease and Oncology. Baseline demographics and patient characteristics were collected. Endpoints assessed included patient outcomes, antifungal medication use, T2 Candida panel results, corresponding blood culture results, time to appropriate therapy and duration of therapy. Results A total of 628 T2 Candida panels resulted during the study period with 56.6% involving the intensive care setting. The average age was 59.5 years with 52.5% of the population being male. Of the total, 8.1% (n = 60) were positive. Only three patients had a positive fungal blood culture result with a negative T2 panel collected at the same time (sensitivity 94.3%, 95% CI 80.8–99.3; specificity 94.2%, 95% CI 91.4–96.3). 264 (42%) were ordered with concomitant antifungal therapy and 48.1% underwent de-escalation of therapy based on T2 result. The average time to de-escalation was 137 hours. Of the positive results, 40 (66.7%) had an antifungal ordered when the T2 panel was ordered and 30 (50%) were switched to appropriate therapy after T2 resulted in an average time of 11 hours. Conclusion Our data shows that while the T2 Candida Panel demonstrated faster and more sensitive results, there was still a considerable delay in achieving appropriate therapy. The variation in utilization of the T2 Candida Panel indicates that further intervention regarding appropriate use of the panel is required. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]