ESCMID* guideline for the diagnosis and management of Candida diseases 2012: developing European guidelines in clinical microbiology and infectious diseases.

The process to develop a guideline in a European setting remains a challenge. The ESCMID Fungal Infection Study Group (EFISG) successfully achieved this endeavour. After two face-to-face meetings, numerous telephone conferences, and email correspondence, an ESCMID task force (basically composed of members of the Society's Fungal Infection Study Group, EFISG) finalized the ESCMID diagnostic and management/therapeutic guideline for Candida diseases. By appreciating various patient populations at risk for Candida diseases, four subgroups were predefined, mainly ICU patients, paediatric, HIV/AIDS and patients with malignancies including haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Besides treatment recommendations, the ESCMID guidelines provide guidance for diagnostic procedures. For the guidelines, questions were formulated to phrase the intention of a given recommendation, for example, outcome. The recommendation was the clinical intervention, which was graded by a score of A-D for the 'Strength of a recommendation'. The 'level of evidence' received a score of I-III. The author panel was approved by ESCMID, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, European Society of Intensive Care Medicine and the European Confederation of Medical Mycology. The guidelines followed the framework of GRADE and Appraisal of Guidelines, Research, and Evaluation. The drafted guideline was presented at ECCMID 2011 and points of discussion occurring during that meeting were incorporated into the manuscripts. These ESCMID guidelines for the diagnosis and management of Candida diseases provide guidance for clinicians in their daily decision-making process.

Molecular detection and identification of zygomycetes species from paraffin-embedded tissues in a murine model of disseminated zygomycosis: a collaborative European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (ESCMID) Fungal Infection Study Group (EFISG) evaluation.

The present study was performed to assess the interlaboratory reproducibility of the molecular detection and identification of species of Zygomycetes from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded kidney and brain tissues obtained from experimentally infected mice. Animals were infected with one of five species (Rhizopus oryzae, Rhizopus microsporus, Lichtheimia corymbifera, Rhizomucor pusillus, and Mucor circinelloides). Samples with 1, 10, or 30 slide cuts of the tissues were prepared from each paraffin block, the sample identities were blinded for analysis, and the samples were mailed to each of seven laboratories for the assessment of sensitivity. A protocol describing the extraction method and the PCR amplification procedure was provided. The internal transcribed spacer 1 (ITS1) region was amplified by PCR with the fungal universal primers ITS1 and ITS2 and sequenced. As negative results were obtained for 93% of the tissue specimens infected by M. circinelloides, the data for this species were excluded from the analysis. Positive PCR results were obtained for 93% (52/56), 89% (50/56), and 27% (15/56) of the samples with 30, 10, and 1 slide cuts, respectively. There were minor differences, depending on the organ tissue, fungal species, and laboratory. Correct species identification was possible for 100% (30 cuts), 98% (10 cuts), and 93% (1 cut) of the cases. With the protocol used in the present study, the interlaboratory reproducibility of ITS sequencing for the identification of major Zygomycetes species from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues can reach 100%, when enough material is available.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign Guidelines for Management of Severe Sepsis and Septic Shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation (1) indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost) or clearly do not. Weak recommendations (2) indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures before antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for postoperative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B), targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization (2C); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper gastrointestinal bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); and a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSIONS: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Routine use of point-of-care tests: usefulness and application in clinical microbiology.

Point-of-care (POC) tests offer potentially substantial benefits for the management of infectious diseases, mainly by shortening the time to result and by making the test available at the bedside or at remote care centres. Commercial POC tests are already widely available for the diagnosis of bacterial and viral infections and for parasitic diseases, including malaria. Infectious diseases specialists and clinical microbiologists should be aware of the indications and limitations of each rapid test, so that they can use them appropriately and correctly interpret their results. The clinical applications and performance of the most relevant and commonly used POC tests are reviewed. Some of these tests exhibit insufficient sensitivity, and should therefore be coupled to confirmatory tests when the results are negative (e.g. Streptococcus pyogenes rapid antigen detection test), whereas the results of others need to be confirmed when positive (e.g. malaria). New molecular-based tests exhibit better sensitivity and specificity than former immunochromatographic assays (e.g. Streptococcus agalactiae detection). In the coming years, further evolution of POC tests may lead to new diagnostic approaches, such as panel testing, targeting not just a single pathogen, but all possible agents suspected in a specific clinical setting. To reach this goal, the development of serology-based and/or molecular-based microarrays/multiplexed tests will be needed. The availability of modern technology and new microfluidic devices will provide clinical microbiologists with the opportunity to be back at the bedside, proposing a large variety of POC tests that will allow quicker diagnosis and improved patient care.