GENO-2

Invasive fungal infection, particularly intraabdominal candidiasis, exerts a negative impact on the outcome of pancreas transplant recipients (PTRs). Optimal antifungal prophylaxis in this context remains unclear.

We performed a single‐centre retrospective study to compare the incidence of invasive candidiasis during the first 6 post‐transplant months in a cohort of 218 PTRs over two periods in which different agents for antifungal prophylaxis were used: fluconazole (Fluco‐Px) from March 1995 to June 2012, and micafungin followed by fluconazole (Mica‐Px) from July 2012 to December 2018.

A total of 152 and 66 PTRs received Fluco‐Px and Mica‐Px. Mean age was 39.7 ± 7.8 years, 56.4% (123/218) were males, and 85.3% (186/218) underwent simultaneous pancreas–kidney transplantation. Invasive candidiasis occurred in 21.7% (33/152) of PTRs under Fluco‐Px compared to 24.2% (16/66) of those under Mica‐Px (p‐value = .681). Median time from transplantation to infection was 8 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 6–16) under Fluco‐Px versus 6.5 (IQR: 3.3–15.8) under Mica‐Px (p‐value = .623). Non‐albicans Candida species comprised 27.5% (11/40) and 25.0% (4/16) of episodes under Fluco‐Px and Mica‐Px respectively (p‐value = .849). Surgical site infection was the most common form in both groups (82.5% [33/40] and 87.5% [14/16]; p‐value = .954). Multivariable analysis identified cold ischaemia time of the pancreas and kidney grafts, surgical reintervention and insulin requirement after transplantation as risks factor for invasive candidiasis.

This retrospective study did not reveal a significant benefit from the initial use of micafungin‐based antifungal prophylaxis over fluconazole among PTRs in terms of invasive candidiasis.

Prolonged survival of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on environmental surfaces and personal protective equipment may lead to these surfaces transmitting this pathogen to others. We sought to determine the effectiveness of a pulsed-xenon ultraviolet (PX-UV) disinfection system in reducing the load of SARS-CoV-2 on hard surfaces and N95 respirators.

Chamber slides and N95 respirator material were directly inoculated with SARS-CoV-2 and were exposed to different durations of PX-UV.

For hard surfaces, disinfection for 1, 2, and 5 minutes resulted in 3.53 log10, >4.54 log10, and >4.12 log10 reductions in viral load, respectively. For N95 respirators, disinfection for 5 minutes resulted in >4.79 log10 reduction in viral load. PX-UV significantly reduced SARS-CoV-2 on hard surfaces and N95 respirators.

With the potential to rapidly disinfectant environmental surfaces and N95 respirators, PX-UV devices are a promising technology to reduce environmental and personal protective equipment bioburden and to enhance both healthcare worker and patient safety by reducing the risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2.