Next Article in Journal
COVID-19 and C. auris: A Case-Control Study from a Tertiary Care Center in Lebanon
Previous Article in Journal
Hospital-Onset Bloodstream Infections Caused by Eight Sentinel Bacteria: A Nationwide Study in Israel, 2018–2019
Previous Article in Special Issue
Incidence of Histoplasmosis in a Cohort of People with HIV: From Estimations to Reality
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Invasive and Subcutaneous Infections Caused by Filamentous Fungi: Report from a Portuguese Multicentric Surveillance Program

1
Reference Unit for Parasitic and Fungal Infections, Department of Infectious Diseases, National Institute of Health, Dr. Ricardo Jorge, 1649-016 Lisbon, Portugal
2
Microbiology Laboratory, Hospital Egas Moniz, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Ocidental, 1349-019 Lisbon, Portugal
3
Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Central, 1349-019 Lisbon, Portugal
4
Centro Hospitalar Vila Nova de Gaia/Espinho, EPE, 4434-502 Vila Nova de Gaia, Portugal
5
Microbiology Laboratory, Hospital Garcia de Orta, 2805-267 Almada, Portugal
6
Microbiology Laboratory, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte, 1649-035 Lisbon, Portugal
7
Centro Hospitalar de Leiria, 2410-197 Leiria, Portugal
8
Microbiology Laboratory, Centro Hospitalar de entre Douro e Vouga, 4520-211 Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal
9
Microbiology Laboratory, Centro Hospitalar Tondela Viseu, 3460-525 Viseu, Portugal
10
Instituto de Saúde Ambiental, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de Lisboa, 1649-028 Lisbon, Portugal
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Microorganisms 2022, 10(5), 1010; https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10051010
Submission received: 24 March 2022 / Revised: 6 May 2022 / Accepted: 9 May 2022 / Published: 11 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Epidemiology and Diagnosis of Invasive Fungal Infections)

Abstract

:
Invasive fungal infections (IFI) have significantly increased over the past years due to advances in medical care for the at-risk immunocompromised population. IFI are often difficult to diagnose and manage, and can be associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. This study aims to contribute to understanding the etiology of invasive and subcutaneous fungal infections, their associated risk factors, and to perceive the outcome of patients who developed invasive disease, raising awareness of these infections at a local level but also in a global context. A laboratory surveillance approach was conducted over a seven-year period and included: (i) cases of invasive and subcutaneous fungal infections caused by filamentous/dimorphic fungi, confirmed by either microscopy or positive culture from sterile samples, (ii) cases diagnosed as probable IFI according to the criteria established by EORTC/MSG when duly substantiated. Fourteen Portuguese laboratories were enrolled. Cases included in this study were classified according to the new consensus definitions of invasive fungal diseases (IFD) published in 2020 as follows: proven IFI (N = 31), subcutaneous fungal infection (N = 23). Those proven deep fungal infections (N = 54) totalized 71.1% of the total cases, whereas 28.9% were classified as probable IFI (N = 22). It was possible to identify the etiological fungal agent in 73 cases (96%). Aspergillus was the most frequent genera detected, but endemic dimorphic fungi represented 14.47% (N = 11) of the total cases. Despite the small number of cases, a high diversity of species were involved in deep fungal infections. This fact has implications for clinical and laboratory diagnosis, and on the therapeutic management of these infections, since different species, even within the same genus, can present diverse patterns of susceptibility to antifungals.

1. Introduction

Invasive fungal infections (IFI) have significantly increased over the past years due to advances in medical care to the at-risk immunocompromised population [1,2]. The number and heterogeneity of patients at risk have increased, especially due to the wider use of intensive myelosuppressive and/or immunosuppressive agents in the treatment of haematological cancers (in particular in those with acute myeloid leukaemia and myelodysplastic syndromes), the growing number of patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and the increasing aged population [3,4]. In Europe, the number of stem cell transplantations almost doubled between 2000 and 2016 and at the same time, new at-risk populations were identified, as patients with severe influenza or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [5].
The IFI incidence is approximately 6 cases per 100,000 persons per year [5]. Rates of IFI-related mortality in Europe depend on the pathogen, geographical location and underlying characteristics of the patients, with rates ranging from 38 to 80% for invasive aspergillosis [6].
The most frequent filamentous fungi (moulds) isolated from IFI are Aspergillus spp. [3,7,8], but Fusarium spp., Scedosporium spp. and fungi belonging to Mucorales order are increasingly seen [8,9]. Invasive fungal infections caused by these fungi are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with haematological malignancies [10].
IFI are often difficult to detect and treat [11,12], and can be associated with substantial morbidity and mortality [13,14]. Early diagnosis can improve treatment outcomes and potentially reduce IFI-associated hospital costs [15,16,17]. National surveillance programs on IFI raise awareness of these infections, enabling the improvement of their diagnosis and treatment. Until a few decades ago, the prevalence of fungal infections was low or unknown in Portugal, which may be explained by the lack of regular national surveillance and also by the lack of an obligatory reporting system for the occurrence of these infections. In 2017, the burden of serious fungal disease in Portugal was estimated using deterministic scenario modelling, and the incidence and prevalence were calculated [18]. However, a multicentric Portuguese survey involving cases of proven and probable mould diseases was still lacking and no national study on this issue has been published so far, representing a major need at epidemiological level. Therefore, the present study, based on a laboratory surveillance approach, has been conducted over a seven-year period. This study aims to enhance the knowledge about the etiology of invasive and subcutaneous fungal infections among the participating hospital units, to understand the main risk factors associated with those infections and to perceive the outcome of patients who developed invasive disease.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Cases’ Registry

Microbiology laboratories from hospitals belonging to the national health system were invited to participate in a multicentric surveillance program on fungal infections. Each hospital unit designated a focal-point element responsible for collecting the fungal isolate (whenever possible) and for gathering clinical, laboratory and epidemiological information. These data were registered, filling out a survey that included questions related to the patients‘ demographic features, clinical and mycological criteria and also host factors for case inclusion. The survey also included questions linked to patients’ risk factors for invasive fungal infection and their outcome after 30 days of therapy. Risk factors included in the questionnaire were divided into three groups: (a) immunosuppression factors (chemotherapy, hematopoietic bone marrow transplantation, allogeneic bone marrow transplantation, solid organ transplantation, HIV/AIDS infection, another disorder requiring immunosuppression; (b) trauma/intervention (hospitalization in the ICU, invasive surgery, burn, penetrating trauma) and (c) chronic diseases/behavioral factors (alcoholism, COPD (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney/liver disease, travel to endemic fungal infections, premature birth). All the included cases were anonymized before being added to the network.
This laboratory network enrolled fourteen microbiology laboratories from hospitals located predominantly in the central and northern regions of Portugal. Nine of these fourteen centers participated actively in the present study.

2.2. Criteria Used for the Inclusion of Cases in This Study

From all the reported cases (from January 2013 to May 2020), the ones included for further analysis were: (i) cases of proven fungal invasive and subcutaneous infections caused by filamentous/dimorphic fungi, confirmed by microscopy, positive culture obtained from sterile samples (collected by biopsy or puncture) or by panfungal PCR, performed in tissue samples with visible fungal structures and when clinical was compatible with fungal infection; (ii) cases diagnosed as probable IFI according to the criteria established by EORTC/MSG 2020 [19] with mycological evidence of infection (filamentous fungi recovered by culture or microscopic detection of fungal elements in sputum, BAL, bronchial brush, or aspirate, detection of the antigen galactomannan, and Aspergillus PCR) when duly substantiated by the presence of a host factor and clinical feature. Cases of fungal infections caused by Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp. and Pneumocystis jirovecii were not included.

2.3. Identification of the Isolated Fungi

When a positive culture was obtained, the isolated fungi was sent to the Mycology National Reference Laboratory at the National Health Reference Dr. Ricardo Jorge (INSA), IP to confirm the identification to genus/species level. In a first step, isolated fungi were identified based on the observation of their macro and microscopic morphology according to what is described in the identification atlas [20]. To achieve and/or confirm the identification at the species level, extraction of total DNA from fungal colonies was performed, and species level identification was achieved by sequencing the ITS (internal transcribed spacer) region of the ribosomal DNA [21] or, in the case of the Aspergillus spp., by partial sequencing of the coding region for calmodulin [22]. The obtained sequences were then compared with sequences deposited in NCBI Blast and Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute databases. In samples with positive histology for fungal structures and from which no culture was obtained, an in house panfungal PCR or a PCR targeted to Aspergillus or Mucorales (Pathonostics® (Maastricht, The Netherlands)) were performed, whenever possible, to identify the fungal agent [23,24].

3. Results

During the study period (January 2013 to May 2020), 103 cases were submitted to our surveillance program and 76 were validated, the majority of them from Lisbon and the Tagus Valley region.
Included cases were categorized as invasive fungal infections (IFI) (N = 53) and as subcutaneous fungal infections (SFI) (N = 23) (Table 1). Overall, these infections were more frequently reported in males (N = 51) and less frequently in females (N = 25). The median age of patients was 59.5 years (ranging 3–90 years). Table 1 shows these data discriminated by type of infection (IFI and SFI).
The validated 76 reports were distributed as follows: 54 cases of proven fungal infections from which 31 were classified as IFI and 23 as SFI, totaling 71.1% (N = 54) of proven fungal infections and 28.9% (N = 22) of probable IFI (Table 2). The obtained results show that 11 IFI cases were caused by endemic fungi. Invasive proven and probable fungal infections represented 69.7% (N = 53) of total cases. Analysis of our data revealed a predominance of localized infections (N = 66). Disseminated infections were observed only in 10 cases. From these latter, nine were classified as proven IFI, four of them were caused by endemic dimorphic fungi and one was classified as a probable IFI.
In general, positive microscopy was detected in about half of the cases and positive cultures were obtained in 83.0 and 95.6 of IFI and SFI cases, respectively (Table 1). In eight cases (no. 25, 29, 32, 53, 64, 66, 70, 74) no positive culture was obtained and in two cases (no. 36, and 52) cultures were not performed (Table 2). These cases were included as validated cases of IFI based on the positive microscopy of the samples, collected from a sterile site. Septate/aseptate hyphae or characteristic structures of endemic fungi (P. brasiliensiis and H. capsulatum duboisii) were observed in those samples. In seven of those cases (no. 29, 32, 36, 52, 66, 70, 74) it was possible to confirm the identification of the etiological agent through panfungal PCR followed by sequencing. In case no. 29, only the application of real time PCR targeted to Aspergillus allowed the identification of the possible etiological agent, since microscopy was not performed, and culture was negative. Case no. 36 presented aseptate hyphae in direct microscopy and Mucorales infection was confirmed by real time PCR targeted to Mucorales, but this test does not allow the identification of the etiological agent. Furthermore, sample no. 64 showed aseptate hyphae, but identification of the etiological agent was not performed because the Mucorales culture was lost. Although positive fungal structures were seen in tissue from sample no. 53, culture and panfungal PCR were both negative. Thus, in 73 out of 76 cases (96%), it was possible to identify the etiological fungal agent (Table 2).
Aspergillus was the most frequent fungal genera detected (N = 15; 19.7%), being more frequently identified in the proven and probable IFI. Section Fumigati was the most frequent section found (N =11), representing 20.8% of the etiological agents causing proven and probable IFI (N = 53). In this section, the species A. fumigatus sensu stricto was the most frequently detected, but A. felis/parafelis was also identified in one case (case no. 63). The remaining Aspergillus sections identified in this study were Flavi (N = 2), Nigri (N = 1) and Nidulantes (N = 1).
Infections caused by the genera Scedosporium spp. (N = 9), Alternaria spp. (N = 9) and Fusarium (N = 6) represented, respectively, 11.8%, 11.8% and 7.9% of the validated cases. Species from the Scedosporium apiospermum complex and the species Alternaria infectoria were the most frequently detected in subcutaneous infections.
Aseptate fungi belonging to the Mucorales order (N = 7) were the cause of 9.2% of the studied infections, and the genera identified were Mucor, Rhizopus, Cunninghamella, Lichteimia and Saksenaea. The latter, less frequently identified, was responsible for a subcutaneous infection as a result of a penetrating trauma (case no. 35) (Table 2).
During the study period, it was also observed that invasive fungal infections (proven and probable) were caused by rare fungal agents, namely the dematiaceous fungi Cladophialophora bantiana (brain abcess), several species of Mucorales (Cunninghamella bertholetiae, Mucor velutinosus, Rhizopus microsporus, Lichteimia racemosa), and several species of hyaline fungi as Fusarium spp. (F. solani, F. dimerum. F. proliferatum, F. neocosmoporielum), Purpureocillium lillacinus (eye infection), Paecillomyces formosus and Radulidium subulatum (respiratory infection) (Table 2).
Infections caused by dimorphic endemic fungi represented 14.5% (N = 11) of the total cases. Those infections were all imported cases from endemic areas and were caused by species belonging to the genera Histoplasma (n = 8) and Paracoccidioides (N = 3) (Table 2).
In 81.6% (N = 62) of cases, one or more risk factors for fungal infection were reported (Table 1 and Table 2). In this study, the main risk factors associated with the development of fungal infections were: immunosuppression (N = 12); invasive surgery (N = 7); alcoholism (N = 6); diabetes mellitus (N = 5), transplantation (N = 13); and acute myeloid leukemia (N = 3). In addition to travelling to endemic regions, HIV/AIDS and alcoholism are also risk factors associated with infections caused by dimorphic endemic fungi.
In 68% of the cases (N = 52), it was not possible to obtain information about the patients’ outcome. Nevertheless, in 33.3% (N = 8) of the 24 cases with reported information on that question, the fungal infection resulted in the patient death (Table 2).

4. Discussion

The results obtained with this multicentric surveillance program allowed the perception of the high diversity of species identified as etiological agents of the diagnosed IFI cases. Some of those species are described as being less susceptible to antifungals [25], which may lead to difficulties in the management of those infections. It is also important to highlight that several rare species were identified as etiological agents of the deep fungal infections, as described in similar studies [26]. In immunosuppressed patients, this fact represents a major challenge in the diagnosis and treatment of these infections. Additionally, the number and heterogeneity of patients at risk for invasive fungal infections have been increasing [5], and the epidemiology of IFI and SFI varies according to the geographical location. Thus, the high intercontinental mobility increases the possibility of detecting infections caused by rare fungi, namely by endemic fungi.
In the following lines, a more detailed analysis on some of the detected fungal agents and associated infections is discussed.

4.1. Invasive Fungal Infections

Taking into account the etiology of the proven and probable IFI (N = 53), the etiological agent predominantly identified in all the analyzed infections is Aspergillus spp. (28.3%). This result is in line with the epidemiology described by the majority of the published European studies (when excluded Candida spp., Cryptococcus spp. And Pneumocystis jiriveci) [27,28,29]. A previous study on the burden of fungal infections in Portugal estimated that 65 cases of invasive aspergillosis (IA) occur annually in HSCT and solid organ-transplanted patients [18]; in this work, we also detected cases from other described risk patients, such as the ones hospitalized in intensive care units, with sarcoidosis or chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (COPD), as also reported in other studies [30,31,32]. In similar studies in the USA, the frequency of IA was 8.9%, whereas dimorphic fungi was 25.2% and 1.1% for Mucorales [33]. Although lower than in the USA, our data revealed a surprisingly high frequency of infections caused by dimorphic fungi (14.5%), since Portugal is not an endemic area of these fungi. The Portuguese fungal burden study [18] described an annual incidence of mucormycosis of 10 cases. In the present study, the infections caused by aseptate fungi have shown a higher frequency (9.2%) than that in the USA studies.
The increased fungal burden and the detected species seem to be related, with the introduction of novel immunosuppressive regimens among patients undergoing bone marrow or solid organ transplants, or treatment for malignancies.
Systemic endemic mycoses are mostly found in the Americas, Africa, and Southeast Asia, where their true burden is poorly defined [34]. During the study period, histoplasmosis and paracoccidioidomycosis were the most frequently detected endemic mycoses. All these cases were imported from endemic areas. These diseases are commonly misdiagnosed as tuberculosis, resulting in a substantial delay in the treatment, being therefore considered as neglected mycoses [34]. In fact, four cases of the reported endemic mycoses resulted in disseminated infection (histoplasmosis) and in three of them, the patient became deceased. The estimated incidence of histoplasmosis is 20% for individuals who had travelled to Latin America for the first time [35]. Paracoccidioidomycosis is the second most prevalent endemic mycosis in Latin America; it is estimated that 10 million of Latin Americans are infected and that 1–2% will present with some clinical form of the disease some weeks to several decades after exposure [34]. Since Portugal is a non-endemic region, the high number of endemic cases reported in this study may be due to the high number of citizens from Latin America (especially from Brazil and African Portuguese speaking countries) living in Portugal. Moreover, according to recent data, in 2011, the estimated number of travels made from Portugal to Americas and to Africa was 2,458,900 and 1,154,000 respectively [18], which reinforces the great exchange of persons among these continents. These numbers show that endemic mycosis should also be considered in clinical diagnosis performed in Portugal. Therefore, although paracoccidiomycosis and histoplasmosis are considered as rare diseases in Portugal, information associated with endemic areas should be kept in mind for persons (immunosuppressed or not) who were born in or have travelled to endemic regions, even if the return from the disease-endemic area occurred many years before the onset of the infection [36].

4.2. Subcutaneous Fungal Infections

In this study, we have considered subcutaneous fungal infection as a separate group for classifying fungal disease due to their differences in the mode of infection, clinical presentation and epidemiological pattern. These are localized infections of the skin and subcutaneous tissue following a traumatic implantation of the aetiologic agent. On rare occasions, lymphatic and hematogenous spreading of the agent can occur [37]. The causative fungi are all soil saprophytes, and the epidemiology of these infections varies geographically.
Sporotrichosis is described as the most prevalent and widespread implantation mycosis in the world [34], but Alternaria was the most frequently identified genus collected from subcutaneous infections in our study. In a review on alternariosis reported up to 2007, most of the cases of subcutaneous infections caused by Alternaria were from Mediterranean countries [38]. The main risk factors described were penetrating trauma, solid organ transplant, diabetes mellitus and immunosuppression. These infections are usually more frequent in males, which may be explained by the fact that outdoor work is carried out more frequently by males, enhancing the risk of skin trauma [38]. Contrarily to other studies [39], our results showed no differences between males and females.
Scedosporium spp. are increasingly recognized as a cause of resistant life-threatening infections in immunocompromised patients [40]. Infections caused by the Scedosporium genus represented 13.0% (N = 3 out of 23) of the subcutaneous infections. Scedosporium apiospermum (complex) was the only species of this genus that was detected in the studied subcutaneous infections. This complex of species is underlined as an emerging opportunistic filamentous fungi, with several reports described [41,42]. Treatment of Scedosporium infections is especially challenging due to the high levels of antifungal resistance [35,43]. Yet regarding subcutaneous infections, Trichophyton rubrum was identified as the etiological agent of three cases of these infections. This species is an anthropophilic dermatophyte fungus, rarely described as causing deep infections. However, several studies have described deep or invasive disease caused by T. rubrum in immunosuppressed patients [44,45]. As in our study, all those cases were from patients subjected to solid organ transplantation. In these cases, invasion is limited mainly to the extremities, and there is subcutaneous involvement, but without involvement of other internal organs [45].
Saksenae vasiformis and Nannizziopsis obscura are fungal species rarely associated with infections. In our study, these species were both isolated from skin biopsies. Organ transplantation and penetrating trauma are frequently referred as risk factors for this type of infection, as occurred in our study. Other risk factors include hematologic malignancy, diabetes, and prolonged corticosteroid use [46,47,48,49].
Until very recently, IFI diagnosis was only based on microscopy and culture. Histological stains for fungi and culture are still the gold standard for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infections [19]. Detection of fungal biomarkers such as the Aspergillus galactomannan [50], 1,3 β-D-glucan and antibody detection for some endemic fungi (in few laboratories in Europe) may also provide data that contribute to IFI diagnosis [19]. The combining antibody and antigen testing enhances the sensitivity in detection histoplasmosis [51], for example.
In the last years, an increase in the commercially available PCR methodologies for the detection of the most frequent fungi, like Aspergillus and Mucorales has been observed. These molecular methodologies are not available for the detection of other emerging fungi like Scedosporium spp, Fusarium spp., and Cladophialophora spp. Even the PCR targeted to Mucorales used in this study, would fail in the detection of Saksenae vasiformis (isolated from a subcutaneous sample after a penetrating trauma). The commercial kit for Mucorales DNA detection used in this study allows the detection (but not the identification) of only of the following genera: Mucor, Cunninghamella, Rhizopus, Rhizomucor and Lichteimia. Saksenae vasiformis was only possible to identify by ITS sequencing of the obtained culture.
Positive cultures were obtained in the majority of the included cases, with the exception of 10. Those cases were included and validated by the observation of fungal structures in samples collected from a usually sterile site. Panfungal PCR followed by sequencing or PCRs targeted to Aspergillus/Mucorales were performed whenever possible, and allowed the identification of the etiological agent in two cases. This fact highlights the essential role of molecular techniques for the detection and identification of IFI agents and that polyphasic approach using several methodologies increases the efficiency of the detection and identification of IFI.
In December 2019, a new guideline on invasive fungal infections was published [19], presenting several changes to the previous guideline. In the new definition of invasive fungal disease, a positive PCR amplification followed by sequencing (applied to paraffinized tissues with histological evidence of infection by filamentous fungi) prove the invasive fungal infection by mold, when in the presence of clinical criteria compatible with infection. Microscopic observation of typical and unique structures of endemic fungi is now considered as a criterion of proven IFI as well. Hence, the revision of the criteria according to these new recommendations increased the number of proven IFI due to the reclassification of some cases, initially classified (in the beginning of this study) according to the previous guidelines.
This study presents several limitations, namely the lack of data on the antifungal susceptibility of the obtained isolates. The representativeness of this work could also be affected by several factors, especially associated with the guideline followed for the inclusion of cases, which was designed targeted to the group of hematological patients, and may therefore not be suitable for critical patients in intensive care units. It is also important to emphasize that the presented results may not reflect the Portuguese reality on deep fungal infections that are probably underrepresented. A higher number of cases were recorded in large urban areas, such as Lisbon and Oporto, where hospitals with a larger number of transplants and critically ill patients predominate. However, data on fungal infections from some regions of the country are lacking. This may contribute to the small number of analyzed cases. Difficulties on laboratory diagnosis of these infections, as the low sensitivity of conventional methods, and the low number of autopsies performed may have also contributed the missing of several IFI cases.

5. Conclusions

This study presents the data on deep fungal infections from a multicentric surveillance program in Portugal, for a seven-year period.
Despite the small number of cases, a high diversity of species involved in deep fungal infections was found during the study period. This fact has implications concerning clinical and laboratory diagnosis and the treatment of these infections, since different species/genera of fungi can present different patterns of susceptibility to antifungals, some of which are resistant to more than one class of antifungals. The surveillance of these infections is therefore essential, along with training in mycology, namely for pathologists, infectious diseases specialists and microbiology laboratory technicians.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, C.V.; Data curation, C.V.; Formal analysis, C.V. and R.S.; Resources, C.T., T.F., G.A., H.S., J.D., D.C., F.S., A.L. and A.M.Q.; Writing—original draft, C.V. and R.S; Writing—review & editing, C.V., C.T, T.F., G.A., H.S., J.D., D.C., F.S., A.L., A.M.Q. and R.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The laboratory surveillance network for invasive and subcutaneous fungal infections is part of a program on surveillance networks promoted by the National Institute of Health. The major goal of this Program is to gather data and publish the obtained results (in a completely anonymous way, according to the national rules of data protection). This network was approved by National Institute of Health Dr. Ricardo Jorge in 2013, and due to its nature was not submitted to the ethics committee’s approval.

Informed Consent Statement

Patient consent was waived due to: the samples used in this study were included on a surveillance network from different laboratories and were completely anonymised and we do not have access to patient ID.

Acknowledgments

To the remaining representatives of the hospital units: Filomena Reis (Hospital Santa Maria Maior); Maria Dolores Pinheiro (Centro Hospitalar São João); Catarina Lameiras (Instituto Português de Oncologia de Lisboa Francisco Gentil); Sandra Paulo (Centro Hospitalar Cova da Beira); Adriana Coutinho (Hospital Espírito Santo de Évora); Maria Alexandra Mendes (Instituto Português de Oncologia de Coimbra Francisco Gentil.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Holzheimer, R.G.; Dralle, H. Management of mycoses in surgical patients-review of the literature. Eur. J. Med. Res. 2002, 7, 200–226. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  2. Pfaller, M.A.; Pappas, P.G.; Wingard, J.R. Invasive Fungal Pathogens: Current Epidemiological Trends. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2006, 43, S3–S14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Maertens, J.; Groll, A.H.; Cordonnier, C.; de la Cámara, R.; Roilides, E.; Marchetti, O. Treatment and timing in invasive mould disease. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 2011, 66, i37–i43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Eliopoulos, G.M.; Perea, S.; Patterson, T.F. Antifungal Resistance in Pathogenic Fungi. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2002, 35, 1073–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Von Lilienfeld-Toal, M.; Wagener, J.; Einsele, H.; Cornely, O.A.; Kurzai, O. Invasive Fungal Infection. Dtsch. Arztebl. Int. 2019, 116, 271–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lass-Flörl, C. The changing face of epidemiology of invasive fungal disease in Europe. Mycoses 2009, 52, 197–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Pagano, L.; Mayor, S. Invasive fungal infections in high-risk patients: Report from TIMM-8 2017. Future Sci. 2018, 4, FSO307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Enoch, D.A.; Ludlam, H.A.; Brown, N.M. Invasive fungal infections: A review of epidemiology and management options. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 55, 809–818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Binder, U.; Lass-Flörl, C. Epidemiology of invasive fungal infections in the mediterranean area. Mediterr. J. Hematol. Infect. Dis. 2011, 3, e20110016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Colombo, A.L.; de Almeida Júnior, J.N.; Slavin, M.A.; Chen, S.C.; Sorrell, T.C. Candida and invasive mould diseases in non-neutropenic critically ill patients and patients with haematological cancer. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2017, 17, e344–e356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ruhnke, M.; Böhme, A.; Buchheidt, D.; Cornely, O.; Donhuijsen, K.; Einsele, H.; Enzensberger, R.; Hebart, H.; Heussel, C.P.; Horger, M.; et al. Diagnosis of invasive fungal infections in hematology and oncology-guidelines from the Infectious Diseases Working Party in Haematology and Oncology of the German Society for Haematology and Oncology (AGIHO). Ann. Oncol. 2012, 23, 823–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Patterson, T.F.; Kirkpatrick, W.R.; White, M.; Hiemenz, J.W.; Wingard, J.R.; Dupont, B.; Rinaldi, M.G.; Stevens, D.A.; Graybill, J.R. Invasive aspergillosis. Disease spectrum, treatment practices, and outcomes. I3 Aspergillus Study Group. Medicine 2000, 79, 250–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Brown, G.D.; Denning, D.W.; Gow, N.A.; Levitz, S.M.; Netea, M.G.; White, T.C. Hidden killers: Human fungal infections. Sci. Transl. Med. 2012, 4, 165rv13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Pappas, P.G.; Alexander, B.D.; Andes, D.R.; Hadley, S.; Kauffman, C.A.; Freifeld, A.; Anaissie, E.J.; Brumble, L.M.; Herwaldt, L.; Ito, J.; et al. Invasive fungal infections among organ transplant recipients: Results of the Transplant-Associated Infection Surveillance Network (TRANSNET). Clin. Infect. Dis. 2010, 50, 1101–1111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Drgona, L.; Khachatryan, A.; Stephens, J.; Charbonneau, C.; Kantecki, M.; Haider, S.; Barnes, S. Clinical and economic burden of invasive fungal diseases in Europe: Focus on pre-emptive and empirical treatment of Aspergillus and Candida species. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2014, 33, 7–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Bongomin, F.; Gago, S.; Oladele, R.O.; Denning, D.W. Global and Multi-National Prevalence of Fungal Diseases-Estimate Precision. J. Fungi 2017, 3, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Dimopoulos, G.; Piagnerelli, M.; Berré, J.; Eddafali, B.; Salmon, I.; Vincent, J.L. Disseminated aspergillosis in intensive care unit patients: An autopsy study. J. Chemother. 2003, 15, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Sabino, R.; Verissímo, C.; Brandão, J.; Martins, C.; Alves, D.; Pais, C.; Denning, D.W. Serious fungal infections in Portugal. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2017, 36, 1345–1352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. De Pauw, B.; Walsh, T.J.; Donnelly, J.P.; Stevens, D.A.; Edwards, J.E.; Calandra, T.; Pappas, P.G.; Maertens, J.; Lortholary, O.; Kauffman, C.A.; et al. Revised definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2008, 46, 1813–1821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Donnelly, J.P.; Chen, S.C.; Kauffman, C.A.; Steinbach, W.J.; Baddley, J.W.; Verweij, P.E.; Clancy, C.J.; Wingard, J.R.; Lockhart, S.R.; Groll, A.H.; et al. Revision and Update of the Consensus Definitions of Invasive Fungal Disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium]. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2020, 71, 1367–1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Hoog, D.; Guarro, J.; Gene, G.; Figueras, M. Atlas of Clinical Fungi–The Ultimate Benchtool for Diagnosis; Version 4.1.4; Centraalbureau voor Schimmelcultures: Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  22. White, T.J.; Bruns, T.; Lee, S.; Taylor, J.W. Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics. In PCR Protocols: A Guide To Methods And Applications; Innis, M.A., Gelfand, D.H., Sninsky, J.J., White, T.J., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 1990; pp. 315–322. [Google Scholar]
  23. Hong, S.B.; Go, S.J.; Shin, H.D.; Frisvad, J.C.; Samson, R.A. Polyphasic taxonomy of Aspergillus fumigatus and related species. Mycologia 2005, 97, 1316–1329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Sabino, R.; Simões, H.; Veríssimo, C. Detection of deep fungal infections: A polyphasic approach. J. Med. Microbiol. 2019, 68, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Barnes, R.A.; White, P.L.; Morton, C.O.; Rogers, T.R.; Cruciani, M.; Loeffler, J.; Donnelly, J.P. Diagnosis of aspergillosis by PCR: Clinical considerations and technical tips. Med. Mycol. 2018, 56, 60–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Perlin, D.S.; Rautemaa-Richardson, R.; Alastruey-Izquierdo, A. The global problem of antifungal resistance: Prevalence, mechanisms, and management. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2017, 17, e383–e392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Skiada, A.; Pavleas, I.; Drogari-Apiranthitou, M. Rare fungal infectious agents: A lurking enemy. F1000Research 2017, 6, 1917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Bitar, D.; Lortholary, O.; Le Strat, Y.; Nicolau, J.; Coignard, B.; Tattevin, P.; Che, D.; Dromer, F. Population-based analysis of invasive fungal infections, France. 2001–2010. Emerg. Infect. Dis. 2014, 20, 1149–1155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Pegorie, M.; Denning, D.W.; Welfare, W. Estimating the burden of invasive and serious fungal disease in the United Kingdom. J. Infect. 2017, 74, 60–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Romani, L. Immunity to fungal infections. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2011, 11, 275–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Xu, J.; Yang, X.; Lv, Z.; Zhou, T.; Liu, H.; Zou, X.; Cao, F.; Zhang, L.; Liu, B.; Chen, W.; et al. Risk Factors for Invasive Aspergillosis in Patients Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit with Coronavirus Disease 2019: A Multicenter Retrospective Study. Front. Med. 2021, 16, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gangneux, J.P.; Camus, C.; Philippe, B. Epidémiologie et facteurs de risque de l’aspergillose invasive du sujet non neutropénique [Epidemiology of and risk factors for invasive aspergillosis in nonneutropenic patients]. Rev. Mal. Respir. 2008, 25, 139–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Webb, B.J.; Ferraro, J.P.; Rea, S.; Kaufusi, S.; Goodman, B.E.; Spalding, J. Epidemiology and Clinical Features of Invasive Fungal Infection in a US Health Care Network. Open Forum Infect. Dis. 2018, 5, ofy187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Queiroz-Telles, F.; Fahal, A.H.; Falci, D.R.; Caceres, D.H.; Chiller, T.; Pasqualotto, A.C. Neglected endemic mycoses. Lancet Infect. Dis. 2017, 17, e367–e377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Gascón, J.; Torres, J.M.; Jiménez, M.; Mejias, T.; Triviño, L.; Gobbi, F.; Quintó, L.; Puig, J.; Corachan, M. Histoplasmosis infection in Spanish travelers to Latin America. Eur J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2005, 24, 839–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Lopes, M.J.; Batista, J.; Trigo, D.; Cunha, J.; Pacheco, P. Histoplasmose africana: Apresentação atípica 40 anos após exposição. In Proceedings of the 14th Encontro Nacional de Atualização em infeciologia, Porto, Portugal, 4–16 October 2015. [Google Scholar]
  37. Welsh, O.; Veasey, J.V. Subcutaneous mycoses. In Tropical Dermatology, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; pp. 202–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Pastor, F.J.; Guarro, J. Alternaria infections: Laboratory diagnosis and relevant clinical features. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2008, 14, 734–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Colombo, A.L.; Tobón, A.; Restrepo, A.; Queiroz-Telles, F.; Nucci, M. Epidemiology of endemic systemic fungal infections in Latin America. Med. Mycol. 2011, 49, 785–798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  40. Cortez, K.J.; Roilides, E.; Quiroz-Telles, F.; Meletiadis, J.; Antachopoulos, C.; Knudsen, T.; Buchanan, W.; Milanovich, J.; Sutton, D.A.; Fothergill, A.; et al. Infections caused by Scedosporium spp. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2008, 21, 157–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Chen, S.C.; Halliday, C.L.; Hoenigl, M.; Cornely, O.A.; Meyer, W. Scedosporium and Lomentospora Infections: Contemporary Microbiological Tools for the Diagnosis of Invasive Disease. J. Fungi 2021, 7, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Loh, U.L.; Tai, P.Y.; Hussein, A.; Qamarruddin, A.F. Scedosporium apiospermum: A Rare Cause of Aggressive Orbital Apex Syndrome. Cureus 2018, 10, e3743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Tóth, E.J.; Nagy, G.R.; Homa, M.; Ábrók, M.; Kiss, I.É.; Nagy, G.; Bata-Csörgő, Z.; Kemény, L.; Urbán, E.; Vágvölgyi, C.; et al. Recurrent Scedosporium apiospermum mycetoma successfully treated by surgical excision and terbinafine treatment: A case report and review of the literature. Ann. Clin. Microbiol. Antimicrob. 2017, 16, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Chastain, M.A.; Reed, R.J.; Pankey, G.A. Deep dermatophytosis: Report of 2 cases and review of the literature. Cutis 2001, 67, 457–462. [Google Scholar]
  45. Nir-Paz, R.; Elinav, H.; Pierard, G.E.; Walker, D.; Maly, A.; Shapiro, M.; Barton, R.C.; Polacheck, I. Deep infection by Trichophyton rubrum in an immunocompromised patient. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2003, 41, 5298–5301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Kpodzo, D.S.; Calderwood, M.S.; Ruchelsman, D.E.; Abramson, J.S.; Piris, A.; Winograd, J.M.; Kotton, C.N. Primary subcutaneous Alternaria alternata infection of the hand in an immunocompromised host. Med. Mycol. 2011, 49, 543–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  47. Boyce, R.D.; Deziel, P.J.; Otley, C.C.; Wilhelm, M.P.; Eid, A.J.; Wengenack, N.L.; Razonable, R.R. Phaeohyphomycosis due to Alternaria species in transplant recipients. Transpl. Infect. Dis. 2010, 12, 242–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Sigera, L.S.M.; Gamage, K.K.K.; Jayawardena, M.N.; Abeydeera, W.P.H.; Malkanthi, M.A.; Jayasekera, P.I.; Patabendige, C.G.U.A.; Fernando, A.H.N. Cutaneous mucormycosis caused by Saksenaea vasiformis in a patient with systemic lupus erythematosus. Clin. Case Rep. 2018, 6, 1730–1734. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Castrejón-Pérez, A.D.; Welsh, E.C.; Miranda, I.; Ocampo-Candiani, J.; Welsh, O. Cutaneous mucormycosis. An. Bras. Dermatol. 2017, 92, 304–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Lass-Flörl, C.; Mutschlechner, W.; Aigner, M.; Grif, K.; Marth, C.; Girschikofsky, M.; Grander, W.; Greil, R.; Russ, G.; Cerkl, P.; et al. Utility of PCR in diagnosis of invasive fungal infections: Real-life data from a multicenter study. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2013, 51, 863–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Azar, M.M.; Hage, C.A. Laboratory Diagnostics for Histoplasmosis. J. Clin. Microbiol. 2017, 55, 1612–1620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Table 1. Overall characterization of the 76 cases included in this study.
Table 1. Overall characterization of the 76 cases included in this study.
Gender AgePositive MicroscopyPositive CultureMost Common Risk Factors
Male (N; %)Median (Range)(N; %)(N; %)
IFI (N = 53)41; 77.361 (3–84)27; 50.944; 83.0Immunosuppression not associated with transplantation or HIV
Subcutaneous (N = 23)10; 43.561 (7–90)13; 56.522; 95.6 Solid organ transplantation and penetrating trauma
Legend: IFI: invasive fungal infection; SFI: subcutaneous fungal infection.
Table 2. Characterization of the validated IFI and SFI cases enrolled in the multicentric surveillance program in the period 2013–2020.
Table 2. Characterization of the validated IFI and SFI cases enrolled in the multicentric surveillance program in the period 2013–2020.
Case No.GenderAgeBiological Sample Microscopy CultureIdentification of the Etiological AgentClassification of the InfectionRisk Factors for Fungal InfectionOutcome
1M40BloodCompatible with Histoplasma capsulatumPositiveHistoplasma capsulatum capsulatumProven IFI
Disseminated
HIV/AIDS; travels to areas with endemic fungiPatient’s death due to fungal infection
2M64Jugal mucosa and BALCompatible with Paracoccidioides brasiliensisPositiveParacoccidoides brasiliensisProven IFI
Localized
Alcoholism; travels to areas with endemic fungiPartial response to antifungal treatment
3F52Tissue and BALSeptate hyphaePositiveScedosporium apiospermum (complex)Proven IFI
Localized
Invasive surgery, imunossupressionPartial response to antifungal treatment
4M48BALSeptate hyphaePositiveA. fumigatus (sensu stricto)Probable IFI
Localized
Solid organ transplant; invasive surgery; alcoholism, chronic liver diseasePatient’s death due to fungal infection
5M76SkinYeastsPositiveHistoplasma capsulatum duboisiiProven IFI
Localized
HIV/AIDS; travels to areas with endemic fungiPartial response to antifungal treatment
6M65Skin (both leg/hand)Septate hyphaePositiveAlternaria infectoria/
Alternaria alternata
Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
Diabetes mellitus; immunosuppressionGood response to antifungal treatment
7M29Bone marrowYeastsPositiveHistoplasma capsulatum capsulatumProven IFI
Disseminated
HIV/AIDS; travels to areas with endemic fungiPatient’s death due to fungal infection
8M77BALNPPositiveAspergillus fumigatus
(sensu stricto)
Probable IFI
Localized
Immunosuppression; intensive care hospitalizationNA
9M56Brain abcessNAPositiveCladophialophora bantianaProven IFI
Localized
Alcoholism, drug abuse, chronic liver diseaseImprovement
10M7Skin Septate hyphaePositiveSchizophyllum communeProven Subcutaneous
Localized
TraumaPartial response to antifungal treatment
11M56Pleural fluidAseptate hyphaePositiveCunninghamella bertholetiaeProbable IFI
Localized
Trauma, alcoholismNA
12F47SkinFungal elementsPositiveSporothrix schenckii
(complex)
Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
NANA
13M64Colon YeastsPositiveHistoplasma capsulatum duboisiiProven IFI
Localized
Alcoholism, travels to areas with endemic fungiNA
14M3Sputum/urineNPPositiveMucor velutinosusProbable IFI
Disseminated
Intensive care hospitalization; invasive surgery; early birthGood response to antifungal treatment
15M67BALNegativePositiveAspergillus fumigatus
(sensu stricto)
Probable IFI
Localized
COPDNA
16M29Skin NegativePositiveTrychophyton verrucosumProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Trauma (cattle breeder)Good response to antifungal treatment
17M68Tonsil YeastsPositiveHistoplasma capsulatum duboisiiProven IFI
Localized
Alcoholism; travels to areas with endemic fungiGood response to antifungal treatment
18F59Skin Septate hyphaePositiveAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
19M81Skin YeastsPositiveTrichosporon montevidenseProven Subcutaneous
Localized
NANA
20F75SkinNPPositiveScedosporium apiospermum (complex)Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
ImunossupressionGood response to antifungal treatment
21F61Skin Compatible with BlastomycesPositiveAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
NANA
22M90SkinSeptate hyphaePositiveScedosporium apiospermum (complex)Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
Immunosuppression (lung cancer)NA
23M29BAL/Thraqueal lesionSeptate hyphaePositiveRadulidium subulatumProbable IFI
Localized
HIV/AIDS; travels to areas with endemic fungiNA
24F42BALNPPositiveScedosporium apiospermum
(complex)
Probable IFI
Localized
Solid organ transplant, COPDNA
25M72SkinLarge yeastsNegativeH. capsulatum duboisiiProven IFI
Localized
Chronic kidney disease; travel to areas with endemic fungi; immunossupressionNA
26M51BALNAPositiveScedosporium aurantiacumProbable IFI
Localized
Organ transplant; HIV/AIDSNA
27M86Sphenoid boneNAPositiveScedosporium apiospermum (complex)Proven IFI
Localized
NANA
28F78BALNAPositiveA. fumigatus (Section)Probable IFI
Localized
Invasive surgeryPatient’s death due to fungal infection
29M14Nasal tissueNPNegativeAspergillus fumigatusProbable IFI
Localized
Bone marrow transplantGood response to antifungal treatment
30F75Skin septate hyphaePositiveAlternaria alternataProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Penetrating traumaNA
31F63Skin NPPositiveAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
ImunossupressionNA
32M47Lip tissueCompatible with Paracoccidioides brasiliensisNegativeParacoccidioides brasiliensisProven IFI
Disseminated
Alcoholism; travels to areas with endemic fungiGood response to antifungal treatment
33M74Skin NPPositiveScedosporium apiospermum (complex)Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
Chemotherapy; invasive surgeryRelapse
34M68Sphenoid boneAseptate hyphaePositiveRhizopus microsporusProven IFI
Disseminated
Diabetes mellitus Patient’s death due to fungal infection
35F80Skin NPPositiveSaksenae vasiformisProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Penetrating traumaNA
36M61Eye tissueAseptate hyphaeNPNot identified Mucorales Proven IFI
Localized
Invasive surgery (eye)NA
37F55BALNPPositiveSedosporium boydiiProven IFI
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
38F79Skin NAPositiveAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
ChemotherapyNA
39M54Bone NPPositiveTrichosporon mucoidesProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Invasive surgery NA
40F48FingerNPPositiveFusarium solani (complex)Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
NANA
41F51Blood cultureNPPositiveFusarium dimerumProven IFI
Disseminated
NANA
42M64Bronchial aspirateNPPositiveExophiala spp.Probable IFI
Localized
ImunossupressionNA
43M53BALNPPositiveAspergillus flavusProbable IFI
Localized
HIV/AIDSNA
44M69Periorbital exsudateNPPositiveNot identified Mucorales Probable IFI
Localized
Diabetes mellitus Patient’s death due to fungal infection
45M65Brain abcessSeptate hyphaePositiveAspergillus fumigatus
(sensu stricto)
Proven IFI
Localized
Diabetes mellitus Patient’s death due to fungal infection
46F40Nasal exsudateNPPositiveFusarium proliferatumProbable IFI
Localized
Imunossupression (acute myeloid leukemia)NA
47M52Stump tissue (traumatic amputation)NPPositiveFusarium neocosmoporielumProven IFI
Localized
Traumatic amputationNA
48M64BAL (but with multiple site isolates)NPPositiveAspergillus fumigatus
(sensu stricto)
Proven IFI
Localized
Intensive care hospitalizationNo response to antifungal treatment
49M83BALNPPositivePaecillomyces formosusProbable
Localized
ImunossupressionNA
50F61Skin NegativePositiveAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
51F26Skin Septate hyphaePositiveFusarium solani/
Fusarium petroliphum
Proven IFI
Disseminated
Imunossupression (acute myeloid leukemia)NA
52M67Lung tissueCompatible with Paracoccidioides brasiliensisNPParacoccidioides brasiliensisProven IFI
Localized
Travels to areas of endemic fungi; intensive smokerNA
53M75Thyroid aspirateSeptate hyphaeNegativeNegative Proven IFI
Localized
NANA
54F75BALNPPositiveScedosporium boydiiProbable IFI
Localized
ImunossupressionNA
55M76Blood cultureNAPositiveTrichosporon ashashiiProven IFI
Disseminated
Acute myeloid leukemiaNA
56F58Skin NAPositiveTrychophyton rubrumProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
57M63Brain tissueNAPositiveA. fumigatus
(sensu stricto)
Proven IFI
Localized
NANA
58M56Skin Septate hyphaePositiveSporothrix scheckii
(complex)
Proven Subcutaneous
Localized
NANA
59M65BloodNPPositiveFusarium dimerumProven IFI
Disseminated
Intensive care hospitalizationNA
60M61Cornea scraping tissue NAPositivePurpureocillium lillacinusProbable IFI
Localized
NANA
61M55BALNAPositiveLichteimia racemosaProbable IFI
Localized
Intensive care hospitalization; mechanic ventilationPartial response to antifungal treatment
62F60Skin Septate hyphaePositiveTrychophyton rubrumProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
63F66Bone biopsy/abcessNPPositiveA. fumigatus(section)
A. felis/parafelis
Proven IFI
Localized
Hemato-oncological patientNA
64M56Liver tissueAseptate hyphaeNegativeNot identified Mucorales Proven IFI
Localized
NANA
65M58Skin Septate hyphaePositiveAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
66M63Skin Fungal elementsNegativeAlternaria infectoriaProven Subcutaneous
Localized
NANA
67M37Pleural fluidNPPositiveAspergillus fumigatusProbable IFI
Localized
Imunossupression (sarcoidosis)NA
68M67Skin Septate hyphaePositiveTrychophyton rubrumProbable IFI
Localized
Solid organ transplantNA
69M64Nasal sinus tissueSeptate hyphaePositiveAspergillus fumigatusProven IFI
Localized
NANA
70M52Bone marrowIntracellular yeastsNegativeHistoplasma capsulatum var capsulatumProven IFI
Disseminated
HIV/AIDS; travels to areas with endemic fungiPatient’s death due to fungal infection
71F33Nasal sinus tissueNPPositiveAspergillus flavusProbable IFI
Localized
Imunossupression (severe aplastic anemia)NA
72F56Skin Septate hyphaePositiveNanniziopsis obscuraProven Subcutaneous
Localized
Solid organ transplant (liver); diabetes mellitus No response to antifungal treatment
73M56Tissue (source not referred)Septate hyphaePositiveAspergillus nidulansProven IFI
Localized
HIV/AIDSNA
74M43Lung tissueSeptate hyphaeNegativeCladosporium sphaerospermunProven IFI
Localized
NANA
75F84BAL/sputumSeptate hyphaePositiveAspergillus niger (complex)Probable IFI
Localized
Imunossupression; diabetes mellitus NA
76F40Cervical abscessLarge yeastsPositiveHistoplasma capsulatum duboisiiProven IFI
Localized
HIV/AIDS; travels to areas with endemic fungiNA
Legend: NP: not performed; NA: information not available; COPD: chronic pulmonary obstructive disease; HIV: human immunodeficiency virus; AIDS: acquired immunodeficiency syndrome; BAL: Bronchoalveolar lavage; IFI: invasive fungal infection; SFI: subcutaneous fungal infection.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Veríssimo, C.; Toscano, C.; Ferreira, T.; Abreu, G.; Simões, H.; Diogo, J.; Carvalho, D.; Santiago, F.; Lima, A.; Queirós, A.M.; et al. Invasive and Subcutaneous Infections Caused by Filamentous Fungi: Report from a Portuguese Multicentric Surveillance Program. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10051010

AMA Style

Veríssimo C, Toscano C, Ferreira T, Abreu G, Simões H, Diogo J, Carvalho D, Santiago F, Lima A, Queirós AM, et al. Invasive and Subcutaneous Infections Caused by Filamentous Fungi: Report from a Portuguese Multicentric Surveillance Program. Microorganisms. 2022; 10(5):1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10051010

Chicago/Turabian Style

Veríssimo, Cristina, Cristina Toscano, Teresa Ferreira, Gabriela Abreu, Helena Simões, José Diogo, Dinah Carvalho, Felicidade Santiago, Ana Lima, Ana Maria Queirós, and et al. 2022. "Invasive and Subcutaneous Infections Caused by Filamentous Fungi: Report from a Portuguese Multicentric Surveillance Program" Microorganisms 10, no. 5: 1010. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms10051010

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop