Invasive fungal infections are an important cause of morbidity and mortality, especially in critically ill patients. Increasing resistance rates and inadequate antifungal exposure have been documented in these patients, due to clinically relevant pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) alterations, leading to treatment failure. Physiological changes such as third spacing (movement of fluid from the intravascular compartment to the interstitial space), hypoalbuminemia, renal failure and hepatic failure, as well as common interventions in the intensive care unit, such as renal replacement therapy and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, can lead to these PK and PD alterations. Consequently, a therapeutic target concentration that may be useful for one patient may not be appropriate for another. Regular doses do not take into account the important PK variations in the critically ill, and the need to select an effective dose while minimising toxicity advocates for the use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). This review aims to describe the current evidence regarding optimal PK/PD indices associated with the clinical efficacy of the most commonly used antifungal agents in critically ill patients (azoles, echinocandins, lipid complexes of amphotericin B, and flucytosine), provide a comprehensive understanding of the factors affecting the PK of each agent, document the PK parameters of critically ill patients compared to healthy volunteers, and, finally, make recommendations for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antifungals in critically ill patients.

Background: COVID-19 has changed medical practice nowadays. One of the biggest concerns has been establishing when invasive procedures such as surgery, GI endoscopy or bone marrow transplant are safe; and if it is necessary to consider screening for asymptomatic patients. Methods: We identified asymptomatic patients that were scheduled for invasive procedures from May 2020 to April 2021 at Clínica de Marly. Patients were asked to fill a questionnaire about GI and upper respiratory symptoms and contact with possible/confirmed cases of COVID- 19 in the last 15 days. Patients taken to emergency procedures, who had symptoms or contact with probable/confirmed cases in the last 15 days were excluded. rt-PCR was performed to screen COVID-19. Results: A total of 1837 patients were included. 104 rt-PCRs tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, leading to a 5.66% of identified asymptomatic patients. Patients were followed-up on the 30th day after the procedure. 1733 negative patients responded to our follow-up, in which only 1 death and 2 complications were detected. 102 positive patients were followed-up and no complications or deaths were reported. Conclusions: We found the presence of 5.66% of asymptomatic patients with positive rt-PCR for COVID-19. Safe screening will decide if these invasive interventions can be postponed, or, if the benefit outweighs the risks.

Breast augmentation surgery, like any other surgery, has potential complications, including the less common complication of pleural effusion. We present a unique case of a 44-year-old female who developed pleuritic chest pain and shortness of breath 10 days after her breast augmentation surgery, with no prior history of cardiac or autoimmune conditions. The temporal relationship between the surgery and the onset of symptoms suggested a possible direct link to the implants. Imaging showed a small- to moderate-sized left pleural effusion, and pleural fluid analysis revealed findings suggestive of a foreign body reaction (FBR), including evidence of mesothelial and inflammatory cells with a lymphocyte percentage of 44% and monocytes of 30%. The patient received intravenous steroids at a dose of 40 mg every eight hours for three days while hospitalized, followed by a tapered oral dose of steroids upon discharge, for over three weeks. Follow-up imaging studies showed complete resolution of the pleural effusion. The diagnosis of pleural effusion resulting from FBR to silicone gel-filled breast implants involves a clinical history, cytopathological examination, and the exclusion of other potential causes. This case highlights the importance of considering FBR as a potential cause of pleural effusion post-breast augmentation surgery.