EPICO 2.0 project. Development of educational therapeutic recommendations using the DELPHI technique on invasive candidiasis in critically ill adult patients in special situations.

Background: Although there has been an improved management of invasive candidiasis in the last decade, still controversial issues remain, especially in different therapeutic critical care scenarios.

Aims: We sought to identify the core clinical knowledge and to achieve high agreement recommendations required to care for critically ill adult patients with invasive candidiasis for antifungal treatment in special situations and different scenarios.

Methods: Second prospective Spanish survey reaching consensus by the DELPHI technique, conducted anonymously by electronic e-mail in the first phase to 23 national multidisciplinary experts in invasive fungal infections from five national scientific societies including intensivists, anesthesiologists, microbiologists, pharmacologists and infectious disease specialists, answering 30 questions prepared by a coordination group after a strict review of literature in the last five years. The educational objectives spanned four categories, including peritoneal candidiasis, immunocompromised patients, special situations, and organ failures. The agreement among panelists in each item should be higher than 75% to be selected. In a second phase, after extracting recommendations from the selected items, a meeting was held with more than 60 specialists in a second round invited to validate the preselected recommendations.

Measurements And Main Results: In the first phase, 15 recommendations were preselected (peritoneal candidiasis (3), immunocompromised patients (6), special situations (3), and organ failures (3)). After the second round the following 13 were validated: Peritoneal candidiasis (3): Source control and early adequate antifungal treatment is mandatory; empirical antifungal treatment is recommended in secondary nosocomial peritonitis with Candida spp. colonization risk factors and in tertiary peritonitis. Immunocompromised patients (5): consider hepatotoxicity and interactions before starting antifungal treatment with azoles in transplanted patients; treat candidemia in neutropenic adult patients with antifungal drugs at least 14 days after the first blood culture negative and until normalization of neutrophils is achieved. Caspofungin, if needed, is the echinocandin with most scientific evidence to treat candidemia in neutropenic adult patients; caspofungin is also the first choice drug to treat febrile candidemia; in neutropenic patients with candidemia remove catheter. Special situations (2): in moderate hepatocellular failure, patients with invasive candidiasis use echinocandins (preferably low doses of anidulafungin and caspofungin) and try to avoid azoles; in case of possible interactions review all the drugs involved and preferably use anidulafungin. Organ failures (3): echinocandins are the safest antifungal drugs; reconsider the use of azoles in patients under renal replacement therapy; all of the echinocandins to treat patients under continuous renal replacement therapy are accepted and do not require dosage adjustment.

Conclusions: Treatment of invasive candidiasis in ICU patients requires a broad range of knowledge and skills as summarized in our recommendations. These recommendations may help to optimize the therapeutic management of these patients in special situations and different scenarios and improve their outcome based on the DELPHI methodology.