Log on / register
BioMed Central home | Journals A-Z | Feedback | Support | My details
Open AccessHighly AccessResearch

Single-drug therapy or selective decontamination of the digestive tract as antifungal prophylaxis in critically ill patients: a systematic review

JW Olivier van Till1 email, Oddeke van Ruler1 email, Bas Lamme1 email, Roy JP Weber1 email, Johannes B Reitsma2 email and Marja A Boermeester1 email

1Department of Surgery, Academic Medical Center, P.O. Box 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam, The Netherlands

2Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics, Academic Medical Center, Room J1b-208, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

author email corresponding author email

Critical Care 2007, 11:R126doi:10.1186/cc6191

Published: 7 December 2007


See related letter by Slivestri et al., http://ccforum.com/content/12/3/420

Abstract

Introduction

The objective of this study was to determine and compare the effectiveness of different prophylactic antifungal therapies in critically ill patients on the incidence of yeast colonisation, infection, candidemia, and hospital mortality.

Methods

A systematic review was conducted of prospective trials including adult non-neutropenic patients, comparing single-drug antifungal prophylaxis (SAP) or selective decontamination of the digestive tract (SDD) with controls and with each other.

Results

Thirty-three studies were included (11 SAP and 22 SDD; 5,529 patients). Compared with control groups, both SAP and SDD reduced the incidence of yeast colonisation (SAP: odds ratio [OR] 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20 to 0.70; SDD: OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.29) and infection (SAP: OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.75; SDD: OR 0.29, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.45). Treatment effects were significantly larger in SDD trials than in SAP trials. The incidence of candidemia was reduced by SAP (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.82) but not by SDD (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.40). In-hospital mortality was reduced predominantly by SDD (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.93, numbers needed to treat 15; SAP: OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.00). Effectiveness of prophylaxis reduced with an increased proportion of included surgical patients.

Conclusion

Antifungal prophylaxis (SAP or SDD) is effective in reducing yeast colonisation and infections across a range of critically ill patients. Indirect comparisons suggest that SDD is more effective in reducing yeast-related outcomes, except for candidemia.


© 1999-2009 BioMed Central Ltd unless otherwise stated. Part of Springer Science+Business Media.