Correlation between antifungal clinical practices and a new clinical decision support system ANTIFON-CLIC® for the treatment of invasive candidiasis: a retrospective multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Invasive candidiasis is still recognized as a major cause of morbidity and mortality. To support clinicians in the optimal use of antifungals for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, a computerized decision support system (CDSS) was developed based on institutional guidelines. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the correlation of this newly developed CDSS with clinical practices, we set-up a retrospective multicentre cohort study with the aim of providing the concordance rate between the CDSS recommendation and the medical prescription (NCT05656157). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Adult patients who received caspofungin or fluconazole for the treatment of an invasive candidiasis were included. The analysis of factors associated with concordance was performed using mixed logistic regression models with department as a random effect. RESULTS: From March to November 2022, 190 patients were included from three centres and eight departments: 70 patients from centre A, 84 from centre B and 36 from centre C. Overall, 100 patients received caspofungin and 90 received fluconazole, mostly (59%; 112/190) for empirical/pre-emptive treatment. The overall percentage of concordance between the CDSS and medical prescriptions was 91% (173/190) (confidence interval 95%: 82%-96%). No significant difference in concordance was observed considering the centres (P > 0.99), the department of inclusion (P = 0.968), the antifungal treatment (P = 0.656) or the indication of treatment (P = 0.997). In most cases of discordance (n = 13/17, 76%), the CDSS recommended fluconazole whereas caspofungin was prescribed. The clinical usability evaluated by five clinicians was satisfactory. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrated the high correlation between current antifungal clinical practice and this user-friendly and institutional guidelines-based CDSS.

Additional value of chest CT AI-based quantification of lung involvement in predicting death and ICU admission for COVID-19 patients.

Objectives: We evaluated the contribution of lung lesion quantification on chest CT using a clinical Artificial Intelligence (AI) software in predicting death and intensive care units (ICU) admission for COVID-19 patients. Methods: For 349 patients with positive COVID-19-PCR test that underwent a chest CT scan at admittance or during hospitalization, we applied the AI for lung and lung lesion segmentation to obtain lesion volume (LV), and LV/Total Lung Volume (TLV) ratio. ROC analysis was used to extract the best CT criterion in predicting death and ICU admission. Two prognostic models using multivariate logistic regressions were constructed to predict each outcome and were compared using AUC values. The first model ("Clinical") was based on patients' characteristics and clinical symptoms only. The second model ("Clinical+LV/TLV") included also the best CT criterion. Results: LV/TLV ratio demonstrated best performance for both outcomes; AUC of 67.8% (95% CI: 59.5 - 76.1) and 81.1% (95% CI: 75.7 - 86.5) respectively. Regarding death prediction, AUC values were 76.2% (95% CI: 69.9 - 82.6) and 79.9% (95%IC: 74.4 - 85.5) for the "Clinical" and the "Clinical+LV/TLV" models respectively, showing significant performance increase (+ 3.7%; p-value<0.001) when adding LV/TLV ratio. Similarly, for ICU admission prediction, AUC values were 74.9% (IC 95%: 69.2 - 80.6) and 84.8% (IC 95%: 80.4 - 89.2) respectively corresponding to significant performance increase (+ 10%: p-value<0.001). Conclusions: Using a clinical AI software to quantify the COVID-19 lung involvement on chest CT, combined with clinical variables, allows better prediction of death and ICU admission.

Chest CT for rapid triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic: experience report from a large French university hospital.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the diagnostic performances of chest CT for triage of patients in multiple emergency departments during COVID-19 epidemic, in comparison with reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) test. METHOD: From March 3 to April 4, 2020, 694 consecutive patients from three emergency departments of a large university hospital, for which a hospitalization was planned whatever the reasons, i.e., COVID- or non-COVID-related, underwent a chest CT and one or several RT-PCR tests. Chest CTs were rated as "Surely COVID+," "Possible COVID+," or "COVID-" by experienced radiologists. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated using the final RT-PCR test as standard of reference. The delays for CT reports and RT-PCR results were recorded and compared. RESULTS: Among the 694 patients, 287 were positive on the final RT-PCR exam. Concerning the 694 chest CT, 308 were rated as "Surely COVID+", 34 as "Possible COVID+," and 352 as "COVID-." When considering only the "Surely COVID+" CT as positive, accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV reached 88.9%, 90.2%, 88%, 84.1%, and 92.7%, respectively, with respect to final RT-PCR test. The mean delay for CT reports was three times shorter than for RT-PCR results (187 ± 148 min versus 573 ± 327 min, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: During COVID-19 epidemic phase, chest CT is a rapid and most probably an adequately reliable tool to refer patients requiring hospitalization to the COVID+ or COVID- hospital units, when response times for virological tests are too long. KEY POINTS: • In a large university hospital in Lyon, France, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV of chest CT for COVID-19 reached 88.9%, 90.2%, 88%, 84.1%, and 92.7%, respectively, using RT-PCR as standard of reference. • The mean delay for CT reports was three times shorter than for RT-PCR results (187 ± 148 min versus 573 ± 327 min, p < 0.0001). • Due to high accuracy of chest CT for COVID-19 and shorter time for CT reports than RT-PCR results, chest CT can be used to orient patients suspected to be positive towards the COVID+ unit to decrease congestion in the emergency departments.