In recent years, global public health efforts have increasingly emphasized the critical role of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) in improving outcomes, reducing costs, and combating the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance. However, antifungal stewardship (AFS) has remained relatively overlooked despite the staggering impact of invasive fungal infections (IFIs). This burden is particularly pronounced in hospitals worldwide, with the Middle East facing significant unmet needs. The rising population of immunocompromised individuals vulnerable to IFI has prompted an increased reliance on antifungal agents for both prevention and treatment. Given the considerable mortality associated with IFIs and the emergence of antifungal resistance, implementing AFS programs in hospital settings is becoming increasingly urgent. In this article, we offer expert insights into the strategies that can be used for successful antifungal stewardship program implementation in IFI. Drawing upon the extensive clinical experience of a multinational and multidisciplinary panel, we present recommendations for optimizing AFS practices. We delve into the challenges and practical considerations of tailoring local AFS initiatives to the evolving landscape of fungal infections. Additionally, we provide actionable recommendations and position statements for the effective implementation of AFS programs, informed by the collective clinical experiences of panel members across their respective countries of practice.

暂无摘要。

The detailed epidemiology of invasive mycoses and superficial mycoses has not been clarified in Japan. In addition, treatment options have increased because of novel antifungals and/or guidelines for fungal infection. In the present study, we aimed to clarify the trends of antifungal use in Japan from 2006 to 2015 based on sales data to serve as an alternative indicator of fungal infection trends. We found that the total antifungal use decreased over time (r = -0.057, Pfor trend < 0.0001). Oral and parenteral use significantly decreased by 44.1% (r = -0.056, Pfor trend < 0.0001) and 27.1% (r = -0.0012, Pfor trend = 0.00061), respectively. The trend of antifungal use for superficial mycoses significantly decreased by 49.8% (r = -0.061, Pfor trend < 0.0001). However, the trend of antifungal use for invasive mycoses was significantly increased by 19.9% (r = 0.0032, Pfor trend = 0.00045). In Japan, the increase in the number of immunocompromised patients might be associated with the increase in the frequency of antifungal use for invasive mycoses. This is the first study to clarify the trends of antifungal use in Japan. Further research is needed to establish a continuous surveillance system to compare fungal infections between Japan and the world.

The frequency of use of systemic antifungal agents has increased significantly in most tertiary centers. However, antifungal stewardship has received very little attention. The objective of this article was to assess the knowledge of prescribing physicians in our institution as a first step in the development of an antifungal stewardship program. Attending physicians from the departments that prescribe most antifungals were invited to complete a questionnaire based on current guidelines on diagnosis and therapy of invasive candidiasis and invasive aspergillosis (IA). The survey was completed by 60.8% (200/329) of the physicians who were invited to participate. The physicians belonged to the following departments: medical (60%), pediatric (19%), intensive care (15.5%), and surgical (5.5%). The mean (±SD) score of correct responses was 5.16±1.73. In the case of candidiasis, only 55% of the physicians clearly distinguished between colonization and infection, and 17.5% knew the local rate of fluconazole resistance. Thirty-three percent knew the accepted indications for antifungal prophylaxis, and 23% the indications for empirical therapy. However, most physicians knew which antifungals to choose when starting empirical therapy (73.5%). As for aspergillosis, most physicians (67%) could differentiate between colonization and infection, and 34.5% knew the diagnostic value of galactomannan. The radiological features of IA were well recognized by 64%, but only 31.5% were aware of the first line of treatment for IA, and 36% of the recommended duration of therapy. The usefulness of antifungal levels was known by 67%. This simple, easily completed questionnaire enabled us to identify which areas of our training strategy could be improved.